pISSN 0513-5796   eISSN 1976-2437
Open Access, Peer-reviewed, Monthly
    Yonsei Med J. 2006 Jun;47(3):405-414. English.
    Published online Jun 30, 2006.
    https://doi.org/10.3349/ymj.2006.47.3.405
    Copyright © 2006 The Yonsei University College of Medicine
    Original Article

    Significance of Small Dense Low-Density Lipoprotein as a Risk Factor for Coronary Artery Disease and Acute Coronary Syndrome

    Sung Woo Kwon,1 Se-Jung Yoon,1 Tae Soo Kang,1 Hyuck Moon Kwon,1 Jeong-Ho Kim,2 Jihyuk Rhee,1 Sung-Ju Lee,1 Jong-Kwan Park,1 Jae Yun Lim,1 Young Won Yoon,1 and Bum Kee Hong1
      • 1Department of Internal Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
      • 2Department of Laboratory Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
    • Reprint address: requests to Dr. Hyuck Moon Kwon, Division of Cardiology Internal Medicine, Yongdong Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 146-92 Dogok-dong, Kangnam-gu, Seoul 135-720, Korea. Tel: 82-2-2019-3330, 3331, Fax: 82-2-572-0112, Email: kwonhm@yumc.yonsei.ac.kr
    Received September 08, 2005; Accepted December 09, 2005.

    This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

    Abstract

    Small dense LDL (sd-LDL) has recently emerged as an important coronary artery disease (CAD) risk factor. This study was performed to investigate how LDL particle size is related to CAD and acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Blood samples were collected from 504 patients that underwent coronary angiography to evaluate chest pain. The LDL particle size of these samples was measured. The mean LDL particle size was smaller in patients with angiographically proven CAD than in the controls (26.41 ± 0.95 vs 26.73 ± 0.64 nm, p < 0.001), and was negatively correlated with the Framingham risk score (r = -0.121, p = 0.007). Patients with more extensive CAD had smaller LDL particles. LDL particle size was also smaller in patients with acute coronary syndrome as compared to non-ACS patients (26.09 ± 1.42 vs 26.54 ± 0.63 nm, p = 0.011). These results suggest that sd-LDL is independently associated with the incidence and extent of CAD, and can be a risk factor for the development of ACS in the Korean population.

    Keywords
    Small dense LDL; coronary artery disease

    INTRODUCTION

    The importance of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol in the development of atherosclerosis has long been recognized. Thus it is logical that LDL cholesterol remains the primary therapeutic target for coronary artery disease (CAD) prevention. Nevertheless, an increasing amount of research over the past decade has been devoted to the heterogeneity of LDL particles and the atherogenicity of lipids and lipoproteins other than LDL. LDL heterogeneity, along with dietary and genetic influences, is now well recognized as an indicator of differences in lipoprotein composition, size, and metabolism.1-3 For these reasons, small, dense low-density lipoprotein (sd-LDL) is viewed as an important CAD risk factor.1, 4, 5

    There are several proposed biochemical and cellular mechanisms related to the sd-LDL atherogenicity. For example, sd-LDL may reside in the plasma longer,6-10 not bind the LDL receptor as well, bind the scavenger receptor more avidly,11-14 be more susceptible to oxidation,15-17 have fewer antioxidants in its core,18, 19 enter the arterial wall more easily,20, 21 and bind to the glycosaminoglycans in the arterial wall more readily.22, 23 The cellular mechanisms include: an sd-LDL promotion of endothelial cell dysfunction,24 induction of greater PAI-1 (plasminogen activator inhibitor-1) production in endothelial cells,25 an increase in thromboxane secretion in endothelial cells,26 and an increase in arterial smooth muscle intracellular calcium.27

    Several large prospective studies have examined the relationship between sd-LDL and CAD using gradient gel electrophoresis to determine the peak particle size. These found the odds ratio of CAD to increase significantly when sd-LDL was the predominant LDL subclass present.28-30 Evidence from several angiographic clinical trials indicated that successful treatment correlated to a decrease in the number of sd-LDL particles.31-35

    Data regarding the relationship of LDL particle size to the coronary artery disease incidence are limited in the Korean population. Moreover, data on the relationship between LDL particle size and the extent of coronary artery disease or acute coronary syndrome (ACS) are limited worldwide. Therefore, this study was performed to investigate the relationship between LDL particle size and the extent of CAD or acute coronary syndrome. In addition, this study investigated the relationship between LDL particle size and the Global risk assessment score (GRAS) by using Framingham risk score to determine whether sd-LDL can be used as a cardiovascular event predictor.

    MATERIALS AND METHODS

    Subjects

    This study enrolled 504 patients that underwent coronary angiography at Yongdong Severance Hospital, Yonsei University between October 2003 and June 2004. Any patients that had previously undergone coronary angiography, had a history of myocardial infarction, suffered chronic renal failure, were at endstage renal disease, suffered hepatic failure, liver cirrhosis, an infectious disease or had a malignancy were excluded from this study. In addition, data derived from repeated coronary angiography from the same patient were excluded.

    Patients were considered hypertensive if they had a known history of hypertension, systolic blood pressure over 140 mmHg and/or diastolic blood pressure over 90 mmHg. Patients were considered diabetic if they had a fasting serum glucose over 126 mg/dL or if they were being treated with oral hypoglycemic agents or insulin. The height and weight of all subjects were recorded and a body mass index (BMI) was calculated with the formula: weight(kg) height2 (m2).9

    The control group included men and women showing normal or minimal CAD by coronary angiogram. The CAD group was divided into an ACS group and a non-ACS group. Diagnoses of myocardial infarction and angina pectoris were made based on: clinical symptoms, EKG changes and/or biochemical markers. CAD was defined as stenosis of one or more coronary artery branch with 50% of the diameter or more luminal narrowing as seen by coronary angiography.9

    Estimation of the extent of CAD

    The CAD extent was described by Gensini scores.36 The Gensini score is a measure of the extent of myocardial ischemia. These were computed for each coronary artery stenosis, based on the degree of luminal narrowing and the geographic importance of the stenosis.

    Global risk assessment scoring

    A 10-year risk of major coronary events was calculated using the Framingham scoring system, based on Framingham Heart Study.37, 38

    Lipoprotein and metabolic parameter analysis

    Fasting blood samples were obtained by venipuncture on the day of the coronary angiography prior to cardiac catheterization. Total cholesterol, triglyceride, HDL cholesterol, and LDL cholesterol were measured by the direct enzymatic method. The LDL subfraction was analyzed by polyacrylamide tube gel electrophoresis (Quantimetrix Lipoprint™ LDL system, Redondo Beach, CA, USA).39 It was then categorized as either pattern A or B based on the mean LDL particle size. The sd-LDL (subtypes 3-7) percentage of total LDL was measured.

    sd-LDL%=LDL3+LDL4+LDL5+LDL6+LDL7LDL1+LDL2+LDL3+LDL4+LDL5+LDL6+LDL7×100%

    LDL subtypes 1-2 were predominantly large, buoyant LDLs, whereas subtypes 3-7 were predominantly small, dense LDLs. The mean LDL particle size for 'Pattern A' was greater than 26.5 nm, hence named 'large, buoyant LDL dominant', while the mean value of particle size for 'Pattern B' was less than 26.5 nm, thus named 'small, dense LDL dominant'.

    Statistical analysis

    Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS 11.0 for Windows (SPSS Inc., IL, USA). Comparisons between the control and CAD groups were performed using a Student's t-test. All values are described as the mean ± standard deviation. Statistical significance was defined as p < 0.05.

    The extent of CAD was evaluated by reviewing the coronary angiogram and was measured by the Gensini score. The extent of CAD, ACS and mean LDL particle size were investigated by multivariate analysis.

    RESULTS

    Comparison between the CAD patients and the controls

    The demographic and metabolic characteristics of all patients are shown in Table 1. No difference was seen between CAD and control groups in BMI, total cholesterol, or triglyceride levels. A significant difference between the two groups was seen in age, hypertension, incidence of diabetes mellitus, LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, mean LDL size, and sd-LDL fraction. The patients with angiographically proven CAD had a smaller mean LDL particle size than the control group (26.41 ± 0.95 vs 26.73 ± 0.64 nm, p < 0.001) (Table 2).

    Table 1
    Comparison of the Baseline Demographic and Metabolic Characteristics between CAD and Control Groups

    Table 2
    Comparison of the LDL Cholesterol Characteristics between the CAD and Control Groups

    Multivariate analysis of risk factors for CAD

    A multiple logistic regression analysis revealed small, dense LDL fraction to be an independent risk factor for CAD (odds ratio [OR] 2.312, 95% CI 1.512-3.537, p < 0.001) (Table 3).

    Table 3
    Multiple Logistic Regression Analysis for CAD

    Correlation between CAD severity and the mean LDL particle size

    There was a significant difference in the mean Gensini scores between patients with pattern A and B LDL (14.4 ± 22.9 vs 24.1 ± 28.9, p < 0.001) (Fig. 1A). A univariate linear analysis between mean LDL particle size and the Gensini score showed a significant negative correlation (Correlation coefficient = -0.188, p < 0.001) (Fig. 1B).

    Fig. 1
    (A) Comparison of pattern A and B mean Gensini scores. Mean Gensini scores for patterns A and B were significantly different (14.4 ± 22.9 vs 24.1 ± 28.9, p < 0.001). Pattern A represents a predominance of large, buoyant LDLs (mean particle size greater than 26.5 nm). Pattern B represents a predominance of small, dense LDLs (mean particle size smaller than 26.5 nm). (B) Correlation between mean LDL particle size and Gensini score. The mean LDL particle size had a significant negative correlation with the Gensini score (r = -0.188, p < 0.001). r, correlation coefficient.

    Correlation between the mean LDL particle size and Framingham risk score

    The mean LDL particle size showed a significant negative correlation with Framingham risk score (correlation coefficient = -0.121, p = 0.007) (Fig. 2).

    Fig. 2
    Correlation between mean LDL particle size and Framingham risk score. The mean LDL particle size had a negative correlation with GRAS (r = -0.121, p = 0.007). GRAS (global risk assessment score) was obtained by using the Framingham risk scoring method; LDL, low-density lipoprotein; r, correlation coefficient.

    Analysis between ACS and non-ACS CAD patients

    The demographic and metabolic characteristics of the ACS and non-ACS groups are shown in Table 4. There was no significant difference seen between ACS patients and non-ACS patients in age, diabetes mellitus, BMI, total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol or triglyceride levels. A significant difference between the groups was noted in smoking, hypertension, mean LDL particle size, and sd-LDL fraction. The mean LDL particle size was smaller in the ACS group than the non-ACS group (26.09 ± 1.42 vs 26.54 ± 0.63 nm, p = 0.011) (Table 5).

    Table 4
    Comparison of the Demographic and Metabolic Characteristics between the ACS and Non-ACS Groups

    Table 5
    Comparison of the Characteristics of LDL Cholesterol between the ACS and Non-ACS Groups

    Multivariate analysis of risk factors for ACS

    A multiple logistic regression analysis showed that small dense LDL is not an independent risk factor for ACS (odds ratio [OR] 1.394, 95% CI, 0.765-2.540, p = NS) (Table 6).

    Table 6
    Multiple Logistic Regression Analysis for ACS

    DISCUSSION

    Gradient gel electrophoresis under native conditions is commonly used to characterize LDL particle size distribution.40 Densitometric LDL subfraction scans show a bimodal distribution. Pattern A LDL is characterized by a predominance of large, buoyant LDL particles with a major LDL diameter peak greater than 25.5 nm. Pattern B LDL is characterized by a predominance of sd-LDL particles with a major peak less than 25.5 nm.41-43 sd-LDL is often accompanied by triglyceride, increased apo B and decreased high-density lipoprotein (HDL) levels. These dysliproproteinemia are somewhat correlated to increased risk of CAD development. It is not clear, however, whether sd-LDL's influence on CAD development is dependent on any other factors, including changes in lipoproteins and lipid parameters.

    Our results indicate that the sd-LDL fraction of total LDL is significantly associated with CAD. This association is seen in both males and females. Even after adjustment for traditional risk factors, such as: age, obesity, smoking, diabetes mellitus, HDL cholesterol level, and LDL cholesterol level, our multiple logistic regression analysis still showed a significant correlation between sd-LDL and CAD. These findings suggest that sd-LDL can be viewed as an independent risk factor for CAD development apart from the traditional risk factors.

    By using the Gensini score, the present study was able to investigate the correlation between mean LDL particle size and the extent of CAD. Several reports have suggested that sd-LDL may be an independent CAD risk factor and might contribute to CAD severity. These reports simply used the number of diseased coronary arteries as a measure of CAD severity.5, 44 One study reported the sd-LDL prevalence to be strongly associated with various CAD types. This study also found sd-LDL to be independent of traditional and nontraditional coronary risk factors. The study did not show, however, whether sd-LDL was related to the severity and extent of coronary artery lesions as indicated by Gensini scores.43 The present study used the Gensini score as a measure of extent of CAD. Therefore, the present study is the first study to provide evidence of a significant correlation between mean LDL particle size and extent of CAD, as depicted by Gensini scores. Gensini scores should provide a more objective parameter than the number of diseased coronary arteries.

    Many studies have analyzed the relationship between triglyceride, LDL cholesterol, LDL particle size and CAD prevalence. Among these, acute myocardial infarction has been shown to have a strong negative correlation with high triglyceride concentrations and LDL particle size.45-48 Several reports have suggested a negative correlation between LDL particle size and risk of acute myocardial infarction.29, 46 Furthermore, a negative association between LDL particle size and CAD development in general has also been reported.49, 50 When data were adjusted for triglyceride levels, these reports failed to prove that LDL particle size is an independent CAD risk factor. Meanwhile, other studies have demonstrated that the association between CAD and sd-LDL is independent of triglyceride level.44, 51 Our study revealed that LDL particle size is significantly correlated with total cholesterol, triglyceride, HDL cholesterol, and LDL cholesterol. After running the Student's t-test, however, no significant difference was seen in triglyceride level between the CAD and control groups. This is probably due to the relatively large variations in triglyceride level.

    We also studied the correlation between mean LDL particle size and global risk assessment score (GRAS). There was a significant negative correlation between these two parameters. This result suggests that further studies are required to determine whether sd-LDL is a reliable 10-year predictor of coronary event risk.

    sd-LDL is associated with increased triglyceride and decreased HDL levels.52 The LDL size and density are partly affected by the exchange of triglycerides at the expense of cholesteryl esters from LDL, possibly mediated by cholesteryl ester transfer protein. This process causes LDL to become enriched in triglycerides at the expense of cholesteryl esters. Excess triglycerides in the LDL particle allows continued size reduction by hepatic triglyceride lipase, which may result in lipid-poor, thus, protein-rich LDL particles of relatively high density.53 In addition to the addition of triglycerides, it has been suggested that genetic factors and increased hepatic lipase and lipid transfer activities also contribute to LDL heterogenicity. A carbohydrate-rich diet is also known to be associated with an increased sd-LDL level. Increased carbohydrate intake causes free fatty acid synthesis in the liver, which can, potentially, stimulate large triglyceride-rich VLDL production.54

    LDL particle size seems to be more stable, and less influenced by meals than triglyceride levels, although fasting samples are needed for more definitive results. Therefore, LDL particle size is better than triglyceride levels at predicting the development of coronary artery disease. The problem is that the LDL subfraction is more difficult to measure than triglyceride levels. Conventional methods for measuring LDL subfractions, such as density gradient ultracentrifugation, native gradient gel electrophoresis, and nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy are not suitable for a clinical laboratory setting because they are labor intensive, require skillful and experienced technicians, are poorly reproducible and take a significant amount of time to analyze. The recently developed Quantimetrix Lipoprint™ LDL system uses polyacrylamide tube gel electrophoresis and provides more benefits than previous methods. Using this method, LDL subfractions can be easily analyzed in a short time.55

    This study also investigated the correlation between sd-LDL and ACS. The CAD group was divided into an ACS and non-ACS group. The mean LDL particle size was smaller in the ACS group than the non-ACS group. The sd-LDL, as a percentage of total LDL, was higher in the ACS group than the non-ACS group. The multivariate analysis did not support the hypothesis that LDL particle size is an independent risk factor for ACS development. When we compared the lipid profiles of the ACS and non-ACS groups using a Student's t-test, we found no significant difference. The fact that the blood samples were collected on the day of coronary angiography might have affected LDL or HDL values. Several studies have reported a significant decrease in lipid profiles during the acute phase of acute coronary events.56-59

    Lipoprotein (a) (Lp (a)) and oxidized LDL are modified forms of LDL that may also play important roles in the CAD development. Lp (a) accumulates in atherosclerotic lesions, accelerates smooth muscle proliferation and downregulates glucocorticoid receptors. Lp (a) levels are elevated in CAD and contributes to restenosis after angioplasty.60 The relationship between LDL particle size and Lp (a) have not yet been fully explored. Malondialdehyde-modified LDL (MDA-LDL), an oxidized LDL candidate, could be a useful CAD indicator. MDA-LDL levels are, reportedly, significantly associated with LDL particle size. It has been suggested that circulating MDA-LDL plays an important role in atherosclerosis pathogenesis and might become a new therapeutic target for CAD prevention.61 Further studies are needed to identify the relationship between MDA-LDL and CAD and ACS development.

    Although a recent study reported that an LDL size increase was seen after intensive lipid-lowering therapy, and its decrease was strongly associated with CAD progression.31 Further studies are needed to determine if there is a correlation between LDL particle size and the progression or regression of CAD and ACS. Further studies need to be done on patients after intensive lipid-lowering therapy to determine whether LDL particle size or cholesterol level is more important in CAD and ACS development. Furthermore, it would be interesting to examine CAD patients after percutaneous coronary intervention and explore the relationship between LDL particle size and restenosis.

    In summary, LDL particle size was smaller among CAD patients, and correlated with the extent of CAD and ACS. The present study demonstrates that sd-LDL levels are strongly associated with CAD, are independent of both traditional and nontraditional coronary risk factors and are related to the extent of coronary lesions. Furthermore, sd-LDL plays an important role not only in the onset of CAD, but also in the progression of the disease.

    In conclusion, sd-LDL is independently associated with the incidence and extent of CAD, and may be a risk factor for CAD and ACS development in the Korean population.

    Notes

    This work was supported by the Brain Korea 21 Project for Medical Science, Yonsei University and Korean Institute of Medicine.

    References

      1. Lee W, Min WK, Chun S, Jang S, Kim JQ, Lee DH, et al. Low-density lipoprotein subclass and its correlating factors in diabetics. Clin Biochem 2003;36:657–661.
      1. Kwiterovich PO Jr. Clinical relevance of the biochemical, metabolic, and genetic factors that influence low-density lipoprotein heterogeneity. Am J Cardiol 2002;90:30i–47i.
      1. Austin MA, King MC, Vranizan KM, Krauss RM. Atherogenic lipoprotein phenotype. A proposed genetic marker for coronary heart disease risk. Circulation 1990;82:495–506.
      1. Cho HK, Shin G, Ryu SK, Jang Y, Day SP, Stewart G, et al. Regulation of small dense LDL concentration in Korean and Scottish men and women. Atherosclerosis 2002;164:187–193.
      1. Rhim HY, Kim IS, Seung KB, Kang DH, Jang KY, Jun DS, et al. Low-density lipoprotein particle size distribution in subjects with coronary artery disease. Korean Circ J 1998;28:1253–1259.
      1. Rainwater DL, Andres DW, Ford AL, Lowe F, Blanche PJ, Krauss RM. Production of polyacrylamide gradient gels for the electrophoretic resolution of lipoproteins. J Lipid Res 1992;33:1876–1881.
      1. Krauss RM, Burke DJ. Identification of multiple subclasses of plasma low density lipoproteins in normal humans. J Lipid Res 1982;23:97–104.
      1. Yoshida A, Kouwaki M, Matsutani Y, Fukuchi Y, Naito M. Usefulness of serum total cholesterol/triglyceride ratio for predicting the presence of small, dense LDL. J Atheroscler Thromb 2004;11:215–219.
      1. Koba S, Hirano T, Kondo T, Shibata M, Suzuki H, Murakami M, et al. Significance of small dense low-density lipoproteins and other risk factors in patients with various types of coronary heart disease. Am Heart J 2002;144:1026–1035.
      1. Teng B, Sniderman AD, Soutar AK, Thompson GR. Metabolic basis of hyperapobetalipoproteinemia. Turnover of apolipoprotein B in low density lipoprotein and its precursors and subfractions compared with normal and familial hypercholesterolemia. J Clin Invest 1986;77:663–672.
      1. Galeano NF, Al-Haideri M, Keyserman F, Rumsey SC, Deckelbaum RJ. Small dense low density lipoprotein has increased affinity for LDL receptor-independent cell surface binding sites: a potential mechanism for increased atherogenicity. J Lipid Res 1998;39:1263–1273.
      1. Galeano NF, Milne R, Marcel YL, Walsh MT, Levy E, Ngu'yen TD, et al. Apoprotein B structure and receptor recognition of triglyceride-rich low density lipoprotein (LDL) is modified in small LDL but not in triglyceriderich LDL of normal size. J Biol Chem 1994;269:511–519.
      1. Teng B, Sniderman A, Krauss RM, Kwiterovich PO Jr, Milne RW, Marcel YL. Modulation of apolipoprotein B antigenic determinants in human low density lipoprotein subclasses. J Biol Chem 1985;260:5067–5072.
      1. Chen GC, Liu W, Duchateau P, Allaart J, Hamilton RL, Mendel CM, et al. Conformational differences in human apolipoprotein B-100 among subspecies of low density lipoproteins (LDL). Association of altered proteolytic accessibility with decreased receptor binding of LDL subspecies from hypertriglyceridemic subjects. J Biol Chem 1994;269:29121–29128.
      1. De Graaf J, Hak-Lemmers HL, Hectors MP, Demacker PN, Hendriks JC, Stalenhoef AF. Enhanced susceptibility to in vitro oxidation of the dense low density lipoprotein subfraction in healthy subjects. Arterioscler Thromb 1991;11:298–306.
      1. Dejager S, Bruckert E, Chapman MJ. Dense low density lipoprotein subspecies with diminished oxidative resistance predominate in combined hyperlipidemia. J Lipid Res 1993;34:295–308.
      1. Tan KC, Ai VH, Chow WS, Chau MT, Leong L, Lam KS. Influence of low density lipoprotein (LDL) subfraction profile and LDL oxidation on endothelium-dependent and independent vasodilation in patients with type 2 diabetes. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1999;84:3212–3216.
      1. Goulinet S, Chapman MJ. Plasma LDL and HDL subspecies are heterogeneous in particle content of tocopherols and oxygenated and hydrocarbon carotenoids. Relevance to oxidative resistance and atherogenesis. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 1997;17:786–796.
      1. Tribble DL, Rizzo M, Chait A, Lewis DM, Blanche PJ, Krauss RM. Enhanced oxidative susceptibility and reduced antioxidant content of metabolic precursors of small, dense low-density lipoproteins. Am J Med 2001;110:103–110.
      1. Nordestgaard BG, Zilversmit DB. Comparison of arterial intimal clearances of LDL from diabetic and nondiabetic cholesterol-fed rabbits. Differences in intimal clearance explained by size differences. Arteriosclerosis 1989;9:176–183.
      1. Bjornheden T, Babyi A, Bondjers G, Wiklund O. Accumulation of lipoprotein fractions and subfractions in the arterial wall, determined in an in vitro perfusion system. Atherosclerosis 1996;123:43–56.
      1. Hurt-Camejo E, Camejo G, Rosengren B, Lopez F, Wiklund O, Bondjers G. Differential uptake of proteoglycan-selected subfractions of low density lipoprotein by human macrophages. J Lipid Res 1990;31:1387–1398.
      1. Anber V, Griffin BA, McConnell M, Packard CJ, Shepherd J. Influence of plasma lipid and LDL-subfraction profile on the interaction between low density lipoprotein with human arterial wall proteoglycans. Atherosclerosis 1996;124:261–271.
      1. Sattar N, Petrie JR, Jaap AJ. The atherogenic lipoprotein phenotype and vascular endothelial dysfunction. Atherosclerosis 1998;138:229–235.
      1. Festa A, D'Agostino R Jr, Mykkanen L, Tracy R, Howard BV, Haffner SM. Low-density lipoprotein particle size is inversely related to plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 levels. The insulin Resistance Atherosclerosis Study. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 1999;19:605–610.
      1. Weisser B, Locher R, de Graaf J, Moser R, Sachinidis A, Vetter W. Low density lipoprotein subfractions increase thromboxane formation in endothelial cells. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 1993;192:1245–1250.
      1. Weisser B, Locher R, de Graaf J, Vetter W. Low density lipoprotein subfractions and [Ca2+] in vascular smooth muscle cells. Circ Res 1993;73:118–124.
      1. Gardner CD, Fortmann SP, Krauss RM. Association of small low-density lipoprotein particles with the incidence of coronary arterydisease in men and women. JAMA 1996;276:875–881.
      1. Stampfer MJ, Krauss RM, Ma J, Blanche PJ, Holl LG, Sacks FM, et al. A prospective study of triglyceride level, low-density lipoprotein particle diameter, and risk of myocardial infarction. JAMA 1996;276:882–888.
      1. Lamarche B, Tchernof A, Moorjani S, Cantin B, Deganais GR, Lupien PJ, et al. Small, dense low-density lipoprotein particles as a predictor of the risk of ischemic heart disease in men. Prospective results from the Quebec Cardiovascular Study. Circulation 1997;95:69–75.
      1. Zambon A, Hokanson JE, Brown BG, Brunzell JD. Evidence for a new pathophysiological mechanism for coronary artery disease regression: hepatic lipase-mediated changes in LDL density. Circulation 1999;99:1959–1964.
      1. Krauss RM. Relationship of intermediate and low-density lipoprotein subspecies to risk of coronary artery disease. Am Heart J 1987;113:578–582.
      1. Watts GF, Mandalia S, Brunt JN, Salvin BM, Coltart DJ, Lewis B. Independent associations between plasma lipoprotein subfraction levels and the course of coronary artery disease in the St. Thomas' Atherosclerosis Regression Study (STARS). Metabolism 1993;42:1461–1467.
      1. Mack WJ, Krauss RM, Hodis HN. Lipoprotein subclasses in the Monitered Atherosclerosis Regression Study (MARS). Treatment effects and relation to coronary angiographic progression. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 1996;16:697–704.
      1. Miller BD, Alderman EL, Haskell WL, Fair JM, Krauss RM. Predominance of dense low-density particles predicts angiographic benefit of therapy in the Stanford Coronary Risk Intervention Project. Circulation 1996;94:2146–2153.
      1. Gensini GG. A more meaningful scoring system for determining the severity of coronary heart disease. Am J Cardiol 1983;51:606.
      1. Wilson PW, Castelli WP, Kannel WB. Coronary risk prediction in adults (The Framingham Study). Am J Cardiol 1987;59:91G–94G.
      1. Greenland P, Gaziano JM. Clinical practice. Selecting asymptomatic patients for coronary computed tomography or electrocardiographic exercise testing. N Engl J Med 2003;349:465–473.
      1. Hoefner DM, Hodel SD, O'Brien JF, Branum EL, Sun D, Meissner I, et al. Development of a rapid, quantitative method for LDL subfractionation with use of the Quantimatrix Lipoprint LDL System. Clin Chem 2001;47:266–274.
      1. Sniderman AD, Scantlebury T, Cianflione K. Hypertriglyceridemic hyperapob: the unappreciated atherogenic dyslipoproteinemia in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Ann Intern Med 2001;135:447–459.
      1. Millar JS, Packard CJ. Heterogeneity of apolipoprotein B-100-containing lipoproteins: what we have learned from kinetic studies. Curr Opin Lipidol 1998;9:197–202.
      1. Demant T, Packard C. In vivo studies of VLDL metabolism and LDL heterogeneity. Eur Heart J 1998;19 Suppl H:H7–H10.
      1. Packard C, Caslake M, Shepherd J. The role of small, dense low density lipoprotein (LDL): a new look. Int J Cardiol 2000;74 Suppl 1:S17–S22.
      1. Rajman I, Kendall MJ, Cramb R, Holder RL, Salih M, Gammage MD. Investigation of low density lipoprotein subfractions as a coronary risk factor in normotriglyceridaemic men. Atherosclerosis 1996;125:231–242.
      1. Campos H, Genest JJ, Blijlevens E, McNamara JR, Jenner JL, Ordovas JM, et al. Low density lipoprotein particle size and coronary artery disease. Arterioscler Thromb 1992;12:187–195.
      1. Austin MA, Breslow JL, Hennekens CH, Buring JE, Willett WC, Krauss RM. Low-density lipoprotein subclass patterns and risk of myocardial infarction. JAMA 1988;260:1917–1921.
      1. Coresh J, Kwiterovich PO Jr, Smith HH, Bachorik PS. Association of plasma triglyceride concentration and LDL particle diameter, density and chemical composition with premature coronary artery disease in men and women. J Lipid Res 1993;34:1687–1697.
      1. Tornvall P, Karpe F, Carlson LA, Hamsten A. Relationship of low density lipoprotein subfractions to angiographically defined coronary artery disease in young survivors of myocardial infarction. Atherosclerosis 1991;90:67–80.
      1. Campos H, Blijlevens E, McNamara JR, Ordovas JM, Posner BM, Wilson PW, et al. LDL particle size distribution. Results from the Framingham Offspring Study. Arterioscler Thromb 1992;12:1410–1419.
      1. Lamarche B, Lemieux I, Despres JP. The small, dense LDL phenotype and the risk of coronary artery disease: epidemiology, patho-physiology and therapeutic aspects. Diabetes Metab 1999;25:199–211.
      1. Griffin BA, Freeman DJ, Tait GW, Thomson J, Caslake MJ, Packard CJ, et al. Role of plasma triglyceride in the regulation of plasma low density lipoprotein (LDL) subfractions: relative contribution of small, dense LDL to coronary heart disease risk. Atherosclerosis 1994;106:241–253.
      1. Yokota C, Nonogi H, Miyazaki S, Goto Y, Haze K, Hara Y, et al. Lipoprotein analyses in patients with stable angina and acute coronary syndrome. Int J Cardiol 1996;57:161–166.
      1. Deckelbaum RJ, Granot E, Oschry Y, Rose L, Eisenberg S. Plasma triglycerides determines structure-composition in low and high density lipoproteins. Arteriosclerosis 1984;4:225–231.
      1. Campos H, Bailey SM, Gussak LS, Siles X, Ordovas JM, Schaefer EJ. Relations of body habitus, fitness level, and cardiovascular risk factors including lipoproteins and apolipoproteins in a rural and urban Costa Rican population. Arterioscler Thromb 1991;11:1077–1088.
      1. Carmena R, Duriez P, Fruchart JC. Atherogenic lipoprotein particles in atherosclerosis. Circulation 2004;109 Suppl III:III2–III7.
      1. Batalla A, Hevia S, Sieres M, Ravina T. Lipoprotein changes during acute coronary syndromes. Am J Cardiol 2002;90:572.
      1. Ryder RE, Hayes TM, Mulligan IP, Kingswood JC, Williams S, Owens DR. How soon after myocardial infarction should plasma lipid values be assessed? Br Med J 1984;289:1651–1653.
      1. Mainard F, Madec Y, Robinet N. Variations in the composition of low- and high-density lipoproteins during the acute phase of myocardial infarction. Clin Chem 1988;34:139–140.
      1. Fresco C, Maggioni AP, Signorini S, Merlini PA, Mocarelli P, Fabbri G, et al. Variations in lipoprotein levels after myocardial infarction and unstable angina: the LATIN trial. Ital Heart J 2002;3:587–592.
      1. Nielson LB. Atherogenecity of lipoprotein (a) and oxidized low density lipoprotein: insight from in vivo studies of arterial wall influx, degradation and efflux. Atherosclerosis 1999;143:229–243.
      1. Miyazaki T, Shimada K, Sato O, Kotani K, Kume A, Sumiyoshi K, et al. Circulating malondialdehyde-modified LDL and atherogenic lipoprotein profiles measured by nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy in patients with coronary artery disease. Atherosclerosis 2005;179:139–145.
    Cited by
    Crossref 26
    Google Scholar 
    PubMed Central 23
    Scopus 35
    Web of Science 33
    MeSH Terms
    Acute Disease
    Aged
    Biological Markers
    Coronary Arteriosclerosis/blood*
    Coronary Arteriosclerosis/epidemiology*
    Female
    Humans
    Lipoproteins, LDL/blood*
    Lipoproteins, LDL/chemistry
    Male
    Middle Aged
    Particle Size
    Predictive Value of Tests
    Risk Factors
    Metrics
    Share
    Links to
    Figures
    slide
    slide

    1 / 2

    Tables
    slide
    slide
    slide
    slide
    slide
    slide

    1 / 6

    PERMALINK