TY  - JOUR
AU  - Vujović, Ana
AU  - Kotur-Stevuljević, Jelena
AU  - Spasić, Slavica
AU  - Bujisić, Nada
AU  - Martinović, Jelena
AU  - Vujović, Milica
AU  - Spasojević-Kalimanovska, Vesna
AU  - Zeljković, Aleksandra
AU  - Pajić, Dragoljub
PY  - 2010
UR  - https://farfar.pharmacy.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/1374
AB  - Background: Friedewald's formula for the estimation of LDL-C concentration is the most often used formula in clinical practice. A recent formula by Anandaraja and colleagues for LDL-C estimation still needs to be evaluated before it is extensively applied in diagnosis. In the present study we validated existing formulas and derived a more accurate formula to determine LDL-C in a Serbian population. Methods: Our study included 2053 patients with TG  lt = 4.52 mmol/L. In an initial group of 1010 patients, Friedewald's and Anandaraja's formulas were compared to a direct homogenous method for LDL-C determination. The obtained results allowed us to modify Friedewald's formula and apply it in a second group of patients. Results: The mean LDL-C concentrations were 3.9 +/- 1.09 mmol/L, 3.63 +/- 1.06 mmol/L and 3.72 +/- 1.04 mmol/L measured by a direct homogenous assay (D-LDL-C), calculated by Friedewald's formula (F-LDL-C) and calculated by Anandaraja's formula (A-LDL-C), respectively in the 1010 patients. The Student's paired t-test showed that D-LDL-C values were significantly higher than F-LDL-C and A-LDL-C values (p  lt  0.001). The Passing-Bablok regression analysis indicated good correlation between calculated and measured LDL-Cs (r > 0.89). Using lipoprotein values from the initial group we modified Friedewald's formula by replacing the term 2.2 with 3. The new modified formula for LDL-C estimation (S-LDL-C) showed no statistically significant difference compared to D-LDL-C. The absolute bias between these two methods was -0.06 +/- 0.37 mmol/L with a high correlation coefficient (r = 0.96). Conclusions: Our modified formula for LDL-C estimation appears to be more accurate than both Friedewald's and Anandaraja's formulas when applied to a Serbian population.
PB  - BMC, LONDON
T2  - Lipids in Health and Disease
T1  - Evaluation of different formulas for LDL-C calculation
VL  - 9
DO  - 10.1186/1476-511X-9-27
ER  - 

@article{
author = "Vujović, Ana and Kotur-Stevuljević, Jelena and Spasić, Slavica and Bujisić, Nada and Martinović, Jelena and Vujović, Milica and Spasojević-Kalimanovska, Vesna and Zeljković, Aleksandra and Pajić, Dragoljub",
year = "2010",
abstract = "Background: Friedewald's formula for the estimation of LDL-C concentration is the most often used formula in clinical practice. A recent formula by Anandaraja and colleagues for LDL-C estimation still needs to be evaluated before it is extensively applied in diagnosis. In the present study we validated existing formulas and derived a more accurate formula to determine LDL-C in a Serbian population. Methods: Our study included 2053 patients with TG  lt = 4.52 mmol/L. In an initial group of 1010 patients, Friedewald's and Anandaraja's formulas were compared to a direct homogenous method for LDL-C determination. The obtained results allowed us to modify Friedewald's formula and apply it in a second group of patients. Results: The mean LDL-C concentrations were 3.9 +/- 1.09 mmol/L, 3.63 +/- 1.06 mmol/L and 3.72 +/- 1.04 mmol/L measured by a direct homogenous assay (D-LDL-C), calculated by Friedewald's formula (F-LDL-C) and calculated by Anandaraja's formula (A-LDL-C), respectively in the 1010 patients. The Student's paired t-test showed that D-LDL-C values were significantly higher than F-LDL-C and A-LDL-C values (p  lt  0.001). The Passing-Bablok regression analysis indicated good correlation between calculated and measured LDL-Cs (r > 0.89). Using lipoprotein values from the initial group we modified Friedewald's formula by replacing the term 2.2 with 3. The new modified formula for LDL-C estimation (S-LDL-C) showed no statistically significant difference compared to D-LDL-C. The absolute bias between these two methods was -0.06 +/- 0.37 mmol/L with a high correlation coefficient (r = 0.96). Conclusions: Our modified formula for LDL-C estimation appears to be more accurate than both Friedewald's and Anandaraja's formulas when applied to a Serbian population.",
publisher = "BMC, LONDON",
journal = "Lipids in Health and Disease",
title = "Evaluation of different formulas for LDL-C calculation",
volume = "9",
doi = "10.1186/1476-511X-9-27"
}

Vujović, A., Kotur-Stevuljević, J., Spasić, S., Bujisić, N., Martinović, J., Vujović, M., Spasojević-Kalimanovska, V., Zeljković, A.,& Pajić, D.. (2010). Evaluation of different formulas for LDL-C calculation. in Lipids in Health and Disease
BMC, LONDON., 9.
https://doi.org/10.1186/1476-511X-9-27

Vujović A, Kotur-Stevuljević J, Spasić S, Bujisić N, Martinović J, Vujović M, Spasojević-Kalimanovska V, Zeljković A, Pajić D. Evaluation of different formulas for LDL-C calculation. in Lipids in Health and Disease. 2010;9.
doi:10.1186/1476-511X-9-27 .

Vujović, Ana, Kotur-Stevuljević, Jelena, Spasić, Slavica, Bujisić, Nada, Martinović, Jelena, Vujović, Milica, Spasojević-Kalimanovska, Vesna, Zeljković, Aleksandra, Pajić, Dragoljub, "Evaluation of different formulas for LDL-C calculation" in Lipids in Health and Disease, 9 (2010),
https://doi.org/10.1186/1476-511X-9-27 . .