Clinical Chemistry Link to Randox Laboratories Web Site
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Clinical Chemistry 54: 14-16, 2008. First published November 26, 2007; 10.1373/clinchem.2007.098863
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
clinchem.2007.098863v1
54/1/14    most recent
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
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
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 Warnick, G. R.
Right arrow Articles by Nakajima, K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Warnick, G. R.
Right arrow Articles by Nakajima, K.
Related Collections
Right arrow Perspective
(Clinical Chemistry. 2008;54:14-16.)
© 2008 American Association for Clinical Chemistry, Inc.

Perspectives

Fasting versus Nonfasting Triglycerides: Implications for Laboratory Measurements

G. Russell Warnick1,a and Katsuyuki Nakajima2

1 Berkeley Heartlab, Alameda, CA, 2 Nakajima and Associates, Gunma, Japan.

aAddress correspondence to this author at: Berkeley Heartlab, 960 Atlantic Avenue, Suite 100, Alameda, CA 94501. Fax 510-747-1619; e-mail grwarnick@bhlinc.com.

The first 20% of the full text of this article appears below.

Recent publications in the Journal of the American Medical Association (1)(2) report the superiority of the measurement of nonfasting over conventional fasting triglycerides in predicting risk for cardiovascular events, observations consistent with previous studies (3)(4). For decades the usual practice has been to measure triglycerides in blood samples obtained after patients have fasted 8–12 h, a procedure consistent with population studies that specified fasting blood collections to decrease variability and achieve consistency of metabolic state in patients at the time of sample collection (5). Triglyceride values fluctuate widely over time, with a CV of biological variability averaging about 23% and ranging up to 40%, and this variability can confound estimation of the associated cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk (6). Fasting blood collection is thought to decrease this variability (7), a theory supported by the observed correlation between fasting and nonfasting values (8). Nevertheless, because postprandial nonfasting values are more representative of the usual metabolic state, the observed improved prediction of the associated CVD risk is not unexpected. A change in practice to nonfasting collections, however, might affect other applications of the triglyceride determination or other measurements made on the specimens.

Triglycerides are measured in clinical practice not only to assess CVD risk, but also to detect the extreme increases that can contribute to pancreatitis. For this purpose the question of fasting vs nonfasting is largely irrelevant; in fact such high levels could be detected by visual observation of the extent of turbidity and/or a floating fat . . . [Full Text of this Article]






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2008 by the American Association for Clinical Chemistry.