scholarly journals The Association of Lipoprotein(a) and Intraplaque Neovascularization in Patients With Carotid Stenosis: A Retrospective Study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shuang Xia ◽  
Weida Qiu ◽  
Liwen Li ◽  
Bo Kong ◽  
Lan Xu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Carotid Stenosis ◽  
Low Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Binary Logistic Regression ◽  
Plasma Lipoprotein ◽  
Lipoprotein Cholesterol ◽  
Low Density ◽  
Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol ◽  
Lipoprotein A

Abstract Background: Lipoprotein(a) is increasingly recognised as a major risk factor for atherothrombotic cardiovascular disease. We examined whether plasma lipoprotein(a) concentrations were associated with intraplaque neovascularization (IPN) levels in patients with carotid stenosis and in terms of increasing plaque susceptibility to haemorrhage and rupture. Methods: We included 85 patients diagnosed with carotid stenosis as confirmed using carotid ultrasound who were treated at Guangdong General Hospital. The IPN level was determined using contrast-enhanced ultrasound through the movement of the microbubbles. Univariate and multivariate binary logistic regression analyses were used to determine whether lipoprotein(a) affected IPN levels, and whether lipoprotein(a), cholesterol, triglyceride, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol affected IPN levels, respectively. Results: Lipoprotein(a) was a significant predictor of higher IPN levels in binary logistic regression before adjusting for other risk factors (P = 0.031, odds ratio [OR]: 1.238, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.020,1.503) whereas cholesterol, triglyceride, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol were not predicators of IPN in univariate analysis. After adjusting for other risk factors, including age, diabetes mellitus, and smoking status, lipoprotein(a) remained statistically significant in predicting IPN (P = 0.012, OR: 1.335, 95% CI: 1.065,1.674). Conclusions: Plasma lipoprotein(a) concentrations were found to be independently associated with higher IPN levels in patients with carotid stenosis, but not cholesterol, triglyceride, or low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Lowering plasma lipoprotein(a) levels may decrease the risk of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events.

scholarly journals The association of lipoprotein(a) and intraplaque neovascularization in patients with carotid stenosis: a retrospective study

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shuang Xia ◽  
Weida Qiu ◽  
Anping Cai ◽  
Bo Kong ◽  
Lan Xu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Logistic Regression ◽  
Carotid Stenosis ◽  
Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Binary Logistic Regression ◽  
Plasma Lipoprotein ◽  
Lipoprotein Cholesterol ◽  
Comorbid Conditions ◽  
Lipoprotein A ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Background Lipoprotein(a) is genetically determined and increasingly recognized as a major risk factor for arteriosclerotic cardiovascular disease. We examined whether plasma lipoprotein(a) concentrations were associated with intraplaque neovascularization (IPN) grade in patients with carotid stenosis and in terms of increasing plaque susceptibility to haemorrhage and rupture. Methods We included 85 patients diagnosed with carotid stenosis as confirmed using carotid ultrasound who were treated at Guangdong General Hospital. Baseline data, including demographics, comorbid conditions and carotid ultrasonography, were recorded. The IPN grade was determined using contrast-enhanced ultrasound through the movement of the microbubbles. Univariate and multivariate binary logistic regression analyses were used to evaluate the association between lipoprotein(a) and IPN grade, with stepwise adjustment for covariates including age, sex, comorbid conditions and statin therapy (model 1), total cholesterol, triglyceride, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol calculated by Friedwald's formula, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, apolipoprotein A and apolipoprotein B (model 2), maximum plaque thickness and total carotid maximum plaque thickness, degree of carotid stenosis and internal carotid artery (ICA) occlusion (model 3). Results Lipoprotein(a) was a significant predictor of higher IPN grade in binary logistic regression before adjusting for other risk factors (odds ratio [OR] 1.238, 95% confidence interval [CI] (1.020, 1.503), P = 0.031). After adjusting for other risk factors, lipoprotein(a) still remained statistically significant in predicting IPN grade in all model. (Model 1: OR 1.333, 95% CI 1.074, 1.655, P = 0.009; Model 2: OR 1.321, 95% CI 1.059, 1.648, P = 0.014; Model 3: OR 1.305, 95% CI 1.045, 1.628, P = 0.019). Lp(a) ≥ 300 mg/L is also significantly related to IPN compare to < 300 mg/L (OR 2.828, 95% CI 1.055, 7.580, P = 0.039) as well as in model 1, while in model 2 and model 3 there are not significant difference. Conclusions Plasma lipoprotein(a) concentrations were found to be independently associated with higher IPN grade in patients with carotid stenosis. Lowering plasma lipoprotein(a) levels may result in plaque stabilization by avoiding IPN formation.

scholarly journals Assessing the Accuracy of Estimated Lipoprotein(a) Cholesterol and Lipoprotein(a)‐Free Low‐Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Weili Zheng ◽  
Michael Chilazi ◽  
Jihwan Park ◽  
Vasanth Sathiyakumar ◽  
Leslie J. Donato ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Particle Number ◽  
Low Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Interquartile Range ◽  
Lipoprotein Cholesterol ◽  
Low Density ◽  
Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol ◽  
Lipoprotein A ◽  
C 50

Background Accurate measurement of the cholesterol within lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]‐C) and its contribution to low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL‐C) has important implications for risk assessment, diagnosis, and treatment of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, as well as in familial hypercholesterolemia. A method for estimating Lp(a)‐C from particle number using fixed conversion factors has been proposed (Lp[a]‐C from particle number divided by 2.4 for Lp(a) mass, multiplied by 30% for Lp[a]‐C). The accuracy of this method, which theoretically can isolate “Lp(a)‐free LDL‐C,” has not been validated. Methods and Results In 177 875 patients from the VLDbL (Very Large Database of Lipids), we compared estimated Lp(a)‐C and Lp(a)‐free LDL‐C with measured values and quantified absolute and percent error. We compared findings with an analogous data set from the Mayo Clinic Laboratory. Error in estimated Lp(a)‐C and Lp(a)‐free LDL‐C increased with higher Lp(a)‐C values. Median error for estimated Lp(a)‐C <10 mg/dL was −1.9 mg/dL (interquartile range, −4.0 to 0.2); this error increased linearly, overestimating by +30.8 mg/dL (interquartile range, 26.1–36.5) for estimated Lp(a)‐C ≥50 mg/dL. This error relationship persisted after stratification by overall high‐density lipoprotein cholesterol and high‐density lipoprotein cholesterol subtypes. Similar findings were observed in the Mayo cohort. Absolute error for Lp(a)‐free LDL‐C was +2.4 (interquartile range, −0.6 to 5.3) for Lp(a)‐C<10 mg/dL and −31.8 (interquartile range, −37.8 to −26.5) mg/dL for Lp(a)‐C≥50 mg/dL. Conclusions Lp(a)‐C estimations using fixed conversion factors overestimated Lp(a)‐C and subsequently underestimated Lp(a)‐free LDL‐C, especially at clinically relevant Lp(a) values. Application of inaccurate Lp(a)‐C estimations to correct LDL‐C may lead to undertreatment of high‐risk patients.

Abstract P181: Atherogenic Lipoproteins and Incident Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease in the Framingham Offspring Study

Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 141 (Suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hiroaki Ikezaki ◽  
Elise Lim ◽  
Ching-Ti Liu ◽  
L Adrienne Cupples ◽  
Bela F Asztalos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Cardiovascular Disease ◽  
Low Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Lipoprotein Cholesterol ◽  
Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease ◽  
Low Density ◽  
Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol ◽  
Significant Information ◽  
Ascvd Risk

Introduction: Elevated plasma low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), small-dense LDL-C (sdLDL-C), LDL-triglyceride (LDL-TG), triglycerides (TG), remnant-lipoprotein cholesterol (RLP-C), triglyceride-rich lipoprotein-C (TRL-C), very low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (VLDL-C), and lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] levels have been associated with increased atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk. However, these parameters have not been included in risk factors for ASCVD in the pooled cohort equation (PCE). Hypothesis: We assessed the hypothesis that these atherogenic lipoprotein parameters add significant information for ASCVD risk prediction in the Framingham Offspring Study. Methods: We evaluated 3,147 subjects without ASCVD at baseline (mean age 58 years) from participants of Framingham Offspring Study cycle 6, 677 (21.5%) of whom developed inclusive ASCVD over 16 years. Biomarkers of risk were assessed in frozen plasma samples. Total cholesterol, TG, HDL-C, direct LDL-C, sdLDL-C, LDL-TG, Lp(a), RLP-C, and TRL-C were measured by standardized automated analysis. Calculated LDL-C, large buoyant low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (lbLDL-C), VLDL-C, and non-HDL-C values were calculated. Data were analyzed using Cox proportional regression analysis and net reclassification improvement (NRI) analysis to identify parameters significantly associated with the incidence of ASCVD after controlling for standard ASCVD risk factor and applying the PCE model. Results: All specialized lipoprotein parameters were significant ASCVD risk factors on univariate analysis, but only direct LDL-C, sdLDL-C, and Lp(a) were significant on multivariate analysis with standard risk factors in the model. Together these parameters significantly improved the model c statistic (0.716 vs 0.732, P < 0.05) and net risk reclassification (mean NRI 0.104, P < 0.01) for ASCVD risk. Using the ASCVD risk pooled cohort equation, sdLDL-C, TG, LDL-TG, LDL-C, RLP-C, and TRL-C individually added significant information, but no other parameter added significant information with sdLDL-C (hazard ratio 1.30 for 75th vs 25th percentile, P < 0.0001) in the model. Conclusions: In multivariate analysis, sdLDL-C, direct LDL-C, and Lp(a) contributed significantly to ASCVD risk, but only sdLDL-C added significant risk information to the PCE model, indicating that sdLDL-C may be the most atherogenic lipoprotein particle.

scholarly journals Low‐Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Corrected for Lipoprotein(a) Cholesterol, Risk Thresholds, and Cardiovascular Events

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (23) ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Willeit ◽  
Calvin Yeang ◽  
Patrick M. Moriarty ◽  
Lena Tschiderer ◽  
Stephen A. Varvel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cardiovascular Disease ◽  
Clinical Care ◽  
Low Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Cholesterol Content ◽  
Lipoprotein Cholesterol ◽  
Low Density ◽  
Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol ◽  
Lipoprotein A ◽  
The Impact

Background Conventional "low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL‐C)" assays measure cholesterol content in both low‐density lipoprotein and lipoprotein(a) particles. To clarify the consequences of this methodological limitation for clinical care, our study aimed to compare associations of “LDL‐C” and corrected LDL‐C with risk of cardiovascular disease and to assess the impact of this correction on the classification of patients into guideline‐recommended LDL‐C categories. Methods and Results Lipoprotein(a) cholesterol content was estimated as 30% of lipoprotein(a) mass and subtracted from “LDL‐C” to obtain corrected LDL‐C values (LDL‐C corr30 ). Hazard ratios for cardiovascular disease (defined as coronary heart disease, stroke, or coronary revascularization) were quantified by individual‐patient‐data meta‐analysis of 5 statin landmark trials from the Lipoprotein(a) Studies Collaboration (18 043 patients; 5390 events; 4.7 years median follow‐up). When comparing top versus bottom quartiles, the multivariable‐adjusted hazard ratio for cardiovascular disease was significant for “LDL‐C” (1.17; 95% CI, 1.05–1.31; P =0.005) but not for LDL‐C corr30 (1.07; 95% CI, 0.93–1.22; P =0.362). In a routine laboratory database involving 531 144 patients, reclassification of patients across guideline‐recommended LDL‐C categories when using LDL‐C corr30 was assessed. In “LDL‐C” categories of 70 to <100, 100 to <130, 130 to <190, and ≥190 mg/dL, significant proportions (95% CI) of participants were reassigned to lower LDL‐C categories when LDL‐C corr30 was used: 30.2% (30.0%–30.4%), 35.1% (34.9%–35.4%), 32.9% (32.6%–33.1%), and 41.1% (40.0%–42.2%), respectively. Conclusions “ LDL‐C” was associated with incident cardiovascular disease only when lipoprotein(a) cholesterol content was included in its measurement. Refinement in techniques to accurately measure LDL‐C, particularly in patients with elevated lipoprotein(a) levels, is warranted to assign risk to the responsible lipoproteins.

scholarly journals Cardiometabolic risk factors are associated with immune cell mitochondrial respiration in humans

2020 ◽  
Vol 319 (2) ◽  
pp. H481-H487
Author(s):  
Theodore M. DeConne ◽  
Eric R. Muñoz ◽  
Faria Sanjana ◽  
Joshua C. Hobson ◽  
Christopher R. Martens
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Systolic Blood Pressure ◽  
Mitochondrial Respiration ◽  
Cardiometabolic Risk ◽  
Low Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Lipoprotein Cholesterol ◽  
Low Density ◽  
Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol

Independent of other cardiometabolic risk factors, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and systolic blood pressure were found to be negatively associated with several parameters of mitochondrial respiration in peripheral blood mononuclear cells of healthy adults. These data suggest that low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and systolic blood pressure may induce metabolic reprogramming of immune cells, contributing to increased cardiovascular disease risk and impaired immune health.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document