Fasting cholesterol tests 'not needed'

[Pumper_Sue]

GPs do not need to ask patients to fast before taking a cholesterol test as it makes very little difference to the results, a large-scale study has suggested.

Canadian researchers found that mean levels of total cholesterol and HDL-cholesterol varied by less than 2% among individuals with fasting times of between one and 16 hours.

The researchers concluded fasting for routine lipid levels was ?largely unnecessary?, contradicting best practice as recommended by NICE and the Joint British Societies.

Their study looked at the laboratory results of blood samples from 111,048 women and 98,132 men in the community and cross-referenced this with the duration they had fasted before the sample was taken.

The data was from a six-month period in 2011 and researchers controlled for the differing age of patients. They then estimated the mean levels of cholesterol subclasses recorded at different fasting times.

The mean levels of total cholesterol and HDL-cholesterol differed little among individuals with various fasting times, with variations of less than 2%.

Fasting times of up to five hours did show statistically significant differences among the calculated LDL-cholesterol levels and triglycerides compared with either a nine to 12-hour fasting time or a greater than eight-hour fasting time.


Pulse http://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/clinica...cholesterol-tests-not-needed/20000896.article you may have to register to view the rest of the article.

 

[Northerner]

This is really old news, I read this back in 2009:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8353510.stm

So many 'news' reports and so much research seems to simply duplicate what has been done before. I can see the need for validating research, but it is often presented as new, and often seems completely pointless.

 

[Pumper_Sue]

This is really old news, I read this back in 2009:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8353510.stm

So many 'news' reports and so much research seems to simply duplicate what has been done before. I can see the need for validating research, but it is often presented as new, and often seems completely pointless.

I know it's old news but there's always a debate on here about fasting or not so thought I would post it 🙂

 

[Northerner]

I know it's old news but there's always a debate on here about fasting or not so thought I would post it 🙂

True. I've just been for my blood tests for my diabetes review in a couple of weeks - it was basically left to me to decide whether I fasted or not (I didn't!) 🙂

 

[clairemm]

my dsn told me on monday that i will never be asked to fast for any test again, she said it was guidelines to not ask diabetics to ever fast and the results of any test would be reviewed with the non fasting taken into consideration

 

[MaryPlain]

The mean levels of total cholesterol and HDL-cholesterol differed little among individuals with various fasting times, with variations of less than 2%.

Fasting times of up to five hours did show statistically significant differences among the calculated LDL-cholesterol levels and triglycerides compared with either a nine to 12-hour fasting time or a greater than eight-hour fasting time.

Pulse http://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/clinica...cholesterol-tests-not-needed/20000896.article you may have to register to view the rest of the article.

Interesting that total and HDL aren't affected but LDL and triglycerides are - one consultant told me that triglycerides were, and that as mine were low anyway even without fasting, then fasting wasn't necessary.

However, if the total doesn't change, and the HDL doesn't change, how can the LDL change... surely that would push the total up?

I'm now wondering whether my consultant took into account that I hadn't fasted when she told me that I may have to take statins due to my total and LDL being a bit higher than the limit for people with diabetes.