Clinical Chemistry AACC Online Job Center
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Clinical Chemistry 25: 1934-1938, 1979;
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit an electronic Letter to
the Editor about this paper
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Stein, E. A.
Right arrow Articles by Steiner, P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Stein, E. A.
Right arrow Articles by Steiner, P.

Clinical Chemistry, Vol 25, 1934-1938, Copyright © 1979 by American Association for Clinical Chemistry

Electrophoretic separation of high-density lipoprotein choelsterol evaluated and compared with the modified lipid research clinic procedure

EA Stein, S McNeely and P Steiner

We evaluated a new agarose-gel-electrophoretic procedure (Corning) (I) for separating and quantitating of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDLC), comparing it with the modified Lipid Research Clinics (LRC) procedure (heparin 183 kilounits/L, MnCl2 92 mmol/L) (II). Method I was insensitive to an HDLC concentration of 50 mg/L, but gave a linear dose- response curve between 130 and 1200 mg/L. Method II is sensitive to 50 mg/L and linear from 50--1200 mg/L. The within-plate CV for the Corning method varied from 26.2% for an HDLC of 168 mg/L to 6.8% for 580 mg/L. Within-day between-plate CV for the Corning method ranged from 22.1% at 155 mg/L to 8.0% at 651 mg/L, compared to 3.0 and 0.8% for the modified LRC procedure. Between-day CV for method I was 20, 12.6, 4.3, and 3.5% for HDLC concentrations of 175, 435, 542, and 678 mg/L, respectively; for method II it was 14, 5, 3.5, and 2.6%, respectively. Analysis of HDLC in 100 patients by both procedures showed mean HDLC values to be significantly lower (mean + SD, 27.8 +/- 1.7 mg/L; p less than 0.001) by method I. In 46 patients with HDLC less than 450 mg/L, this difference was accentuated (mean + SD = 40.5 +/- 2.6 mg/L) and clinically significant. Electrophoretic methods offer a promising further alternative method for HDLC separation and quantitation, but the negative bias, present limited sensitivity, and lack of precision at less than 450 mg/L indicate that they are not yet optimal for routine clinical use for patients with values less than 450 mg/L.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1979 by the American Association for Clinical Chemistry.