Abstract
There are pros and cons doing fasting and random non-fasting lipid profile test. However, when we consider cardio vascular risk, non-fasting lipid test more reliable than fasting test. In current practice, using fasting lipid profile was challenged in 2007 by two studies that showed that random non-fasting triglyceride (TG) could be superior than fasting TG in predicting risk of cardiovascular risk. Postprandial concentrations of triglyceride were higher than fasting. However, levels of non-fasting triglycerides are better at predicting future cardiovascular events than levels of fasting triglycerides. Random non-fasting lipid test is not a new phenomenon, it already practicing in Denmark since 2009. Moreover, NICE guidelines have recommended non-fasting test in the primary prevention setting since 2014. As the major shift in newer guidelines reflects the changing focus of risk assessment from LDL to non-HDL cholesterol (apolipoprotein B) as a better predictor of cardiovascular risk, indirectly tell us non-fasting lipid level superior than fasting lipid. The aim of the review is to compare both fasting and non-fasting measurements in our clinical practice.
Published Version (Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
More From: Sri Lanka Journal of Diabetes Endocrinology and Metabolism
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.