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


     

Clinical Chemistry 28: 2116-2120, 1982;
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
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 HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Warnick, G. R.
Right arrow Articles by Albers, J. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Warnick, G. R.
Right arrow Articles by Albers, J. J.

Clinical Chemistry, Vol 28, 2116-2120, Copyright © 1982 by American Association for Clinical Chemistry

Lipoprotein quantification: an electrophoretic method compared with the Lipid Research Clinics method

GR Warnick, T Nguyen, RO Bergelin, PW Wahl and JJ Albers

We compared a turbidimetric electrophoretic method (Lipidophor) for lipoprotein quantification with the standardized Lipid Research Clinics (LRC) method. In the Lipidophor procedure, major lipoproteins are separated by electrophoresis on agarose gels, precipitated on the gels with phosphotungstate-Mg2+ reagent, and the resulting turbidity is measured densitometrically. Measurements of relative turbidity were converted into lipoprotein cholesterol values by the use of numeric constants provided by the manufacturer. Among-day CVs (n = 46) for the Lipidophor method were 6.0%, 3.6%, and 9.9% for cholesterol in the alpha-, beta-, and pre-beta lipoproteins, respectively. The Lipidophor alpha-cholesterol was significantly lower (n = 171 specimens) than the LRC high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol (514 vs 586 mg/L), and beta-cholesterol was significantly higher than the corresponding LRC low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol values (1505 vs 1409 mg/L). The linear relation between the two methods for lipoprotein cholesterol quantification is as follows: Lipidophor alpha = 0.77 LRC HDL + 63 mg/L with correlation coefficient (r) of 0.87; Lipidophor beta = 0.95 LRC LDL + 166 mg/L (r = 0.96); Lipidophor pre-beta = 0.57 LRC very-low- density lipoprotein + 39 mg/L (r = 0.82). We derived a revised algorithm for estimating lipoprotein cholesterol from turbidity measurements. Lipoprotein cholesterol values by the Lipidophor method agree well with those obtained by the LRC method when these constants are used.


The following articles in journals at HighWire Press have cited this article:


Home page
 Diabetes CareHome page
J. Guy, L. Ogden, R. P. Wadwa, R. F. Hamman, E. J. Mayer-Davis, A. D. Liese, R. D'Agostino Jr., S. Marcovina, and D. Dabelea
Lipid and Lipoprotein Profiles in Youth With and Without Type 1 Diabetes: The SEARCH for Diabetes in Youth Case-Control Study
Diabetes Care, March 1, 2009; 32(3): 416 - 420.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Diabetes CareHome page
N. A. West, R. F. Hamman, E. J. Mayer-Davis, R. B. D'Agostino Jr., S. M. Marcovina, A. D. Liese, P. S. Zeitler, S. R. Daniels, and D. Dabelea
Cardiovascular Risk Factors Among Youth With and Without Type 2 Diabetes: Differences and possible mechanisms
Diabetes Care, January 1, 2009; 32(1): 175 - 180.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab.Home page
J. J. Albers, S. M. Marcovina, G. Imperatore, B. M. Snively, J. Stafford, W. Y. Fujimoto, E. J. Mayer-Davis, D. B. Petitti, C. Pihoker, L. Dolan, et al.
Prevalence and Determinants of Elevated Apolipoprotein B and Dense Low-Density Lipoprotein in Youths with Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., March 1, 2008; 93(3): 735 - 742.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Clin. Chem.Home page
M. Nauck, G. R. Warnick, and N. Rifai
Methods for Measurement of LDL-Cholesterol: A Critical Assessment of Direct Measurement by Homogeneous Assays versus Calculation
Clin. Chem., February 1, 2002; 48(2): 236 - 254.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1982 by the American Association for Clinical Chemistry.