Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Pathologyarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
Pathology
Article . 2019 . Peer-reviewed
License: Elsevier TDM
Data sources: Crossref
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
Pathology
Article . 2019
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

Nonfasting versus fasting lipid profile for cardiovascular risk prediction

Authors: Anne Langsted; Børge G. Nordestgaard;

Nonfasting versus fasting lipid profile for cardiovascular risk prediction

Abstract

Before 2009 essentially all societies, guidelines, and statements required fasting before measuring a lipid profile for cardiovascular risk prediction. This was mainly due to the increase seen in triglycerides during a fat tolerance test. However, individuals eat much less fat during a normal day and nonfasting triglycerides have been shown to be superior to fasting in predicting cardiovascular risk. Lipids and lipoproteins only change minimally in response to normal food intake: in four large prospective studies, maximal mean changes were +0.3 mmol/L (26 mg/dL) for triglycerides, -0.2 mmol/L (8 mg/dL) for total cholesterol, -0.2 mmol/L (8 mg/dL) for LDL cholesterol, and -0.1 mmol/L (4 mg/dL) for HDL cholesterol. Further, in 108,602 individuals from the Copenhagen General Population Study in random nonfasting samples, the highest versus the lowest quartile of triglycerides, total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, remnant cholesterol, non-HDL cholesterol, lipoprotein(a), and apolipoprotein B were all associated with higher risk of both ischaemic heart disease and myocardial infarction. Finally, lipid-lowering trials using nonfasting blood samples for assessment of lipid levels found that reducing levels of nonfasting lipids reduced the risk of cardiovascular disease. To date there is no sound scientific evidence as to why fasting should be superior to nonfasting when evaluating a lipid profile for cardiovascular risk prediction. Indeed, nonfasting samples rather than fasting samples have many obvious advantages. First, it would simplify blood sampling in the laboratory. Second, it would benefit the patient, avoiding the inconvenience of fasting and therefore needing to have blood drawn early in the day. Third, for individuals with diabetes, the risk of hypoglycaemia due to fasting would be minimised. Many countries are currently changing their guidelines towards a consensus on measuring a lipid profile for cardiovascular risk prediction in the nonfasting state, simplifying blood sampling for patients, laboratories, and clinicians worldwide.

Country
Denmark
Keywords

Risk, Lipids/blood, Lipoproteins, Cardiovascular Diseases/blood, Fasting, Cholesterol/blood, Lipid Metabolism, Postprandial Period, Fasting/blood, Lipids, Risk Assessment, Triglycerides/blood, Cholesterol, Cardiovascular Diseases, Lipoproteins/blood, Humans, Prospective Studies, Triglycerides

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    144
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 1%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 1%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
144
Top 1%
Top 10%
Top 1%
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!