Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol-to-High-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Ratio
LDL C / HDL C
Description
"Low-Density Lipoprotein (LDL) Cholesterol-to-High-Density Lipoprotein (HDL) Cholesterol Ratio" test compares levels of LDL and HDL to assess your cardiovascular balance. A higher ratio may suggest excess “bad” cholesterol relative to “good,” raising the risk of heart disease. Doctors rely on this ratio for patients with borderline or conflicting lipid results. A blood sample provides this targeted insight, helping guide dietary changes, medication, or other treatments. Monitoring this ratio supports more personalized strategies for heart and metabolic health.
Category
Lipids, Proteins
Procedure
Invasive
Sample Type
Blood – Serum
Units
Ratio
Procedure Category
Blood Draw
Test Group
Complete Cardiovascular Group, Complete Lipid Group
Test Group Description
Complete Cardiovascular Group: This group contains comprehensive tests for an extensive evaluation of cardiovascular health, providing thorough insights into heart-related conditions beyond basic assessments. Complete Lipid Group: Extensive tests offer a comprehensive evaluation of lipid levels, providing detailed insights into cholesterol and triglyceride profiles and their implications for cardiovascular health.
Optimal Range
For All Individuals:
Conventional Unit: <2.0 R
SI Unit: Not Applicable
Normal Range
For Men:
Conventional Unit: <3.0 R
SI Unit: Not Applicable
For Women:
Conventional Unit: <2.5 R
SI Unit: Not Applicable
Results That Differ From The Norm (Direct and Indirect Causes)
Abnormal results may indicate:
Alcoholism
Diabetes (High blood sugar levels)
Hypertension (High blood pressure)
Medications (such as certain antipsychotics or corticosteroids)
Metabolic syndrome (cluster of conditions including high blood pressure, high blood sugar, excess body fat around the waist, and abnormal cholesterol levels)
Obesity
Rheumatoid arthritis (Autoimmune joint inflammation)
Smoking
Systemic lupus erythematosus (Autoimmune disease affecting multiple organs)
Transfat intake
Key Reasons For Testing
Cardiovascular Risk Assessment: Provides insights into heart disease and stroke risk.
Atherosclerosis Risk Stratification: Elevated ratios indicate higher arterial plaque risk.
Treatment Efficacy Assessment: Tracks cholesterol-lowering therapy effectiveness.
Metabolic Syndrome Monitoring: Helps diagnose and manage this cluster of cardiovascular risk factors.
Cholesterol Balance Evaluation: Reflects lipid metabolism balance for early atherosclerosis detection.
Health Status Conditions It May Be Used To Assess
Currently, this test is not directly associated with any conditions listed on the Health Status page. However, it may be included as part of a broader set of tests linked to specific health conditions.
Some Prominent Medical Labs That May Offer This Test
Please note that this particular test has not been associated with any of the listed prominent medical labs. We recommend enquiring with your private physician or nearest hospital to determine where this specific test can be performed.
References
Important Note
Any medical procedure yielding results outside the norm may be directly or indirectly linked to the conditions outlined on this page. Various factors, including genetics, medication and supplement usage, recent illnesses, pregnancy, pre-test eating, smoking, and stress, can impact the test's outcome. Additionally, factors like false positives, false negatives, inaccurate analyses, and others can influence results.
Reference ranges, which help healthcare professionals interpret medical tests, may vary depending on age, gender, and other factors. They may also differ between laboratories due to variations in instruments and methods used. Optimal ranges are designed for preventive purposes, aiming to identify trends and potential risks early, while normal ranges reflect conventional laboratory values indicating no current disease or pathology. Your healthcare practitioner may have specific reasons for testing that deviate from the usual or may interpret results differently based on individual circumstances. Proper interpretation typically involves considering clinical findings and other diagnostic tests. Hence, it is crucial to provide your healthcare professionals with a comprehensive medical history, consult with them for result interpretation, and follow their guidance for potential re-testing or additional diagnostics.
Disclaimer
This content is provided solely for informative and educational purposes. It is not intended as a substitute for medical advice or treatment from a personal physician. Regarding the interpretation of their medical test results and/or specific health questions, it is recommended that all readers and viewers consult their physicians or other qualified health professionals. The publisher is not responsible for any adverse health effects that may result from reading or following the information in this educational content. Before beginning any nutrition, supplement, or lifestyle program, all viewers, especially those taking prescription or over-the-counter medications, should consult their physician or health care practitioner.
Please note that while prominent lab names are included in this content, we cannot guarantee that these labs offer all the tests mentioned. For confirmation, individuals should contact the labs directly or consult their medical practitioners. The information provided reflects general knowledge at the time of publication and may not include recent updates or emerging research. Readers should verify details with qualified professionals to ensure the most up-to-date and accurate guidance.
[1] Ridker PM, Rifai N, Cook NR, Bradwin G, Buring JE. Non-HDL cholesterol, apolipoproteins A-I and B100, standard lipid measures, lipid ratios, and CRP as risk factors for cardiovascular disease in women. JAMA. 2005;294(3):326-333.
[2] Yusuf S, Hawken S, Ôunpuu S, et al. Effect of potentially modifiable risk factors associated with myocardial infarction in 52 countries (the INTERHEART study): case-control study. Lancet. 2004;364(9438):937-952.
[3] Kinosian B, Glick H, Preiss L, Puder KL. Cholesterol and coronary heart disease: predicting risks in men by changes in levels and ratios. J Investig Med. 1995;43(5):443-450.
[4] Boekholdt SM, Arsenault BJ, Mora S, et al. Association of LDL cholesterol, non-HDL cholesterol, and apolipoprotein B levels with risk of cardiovascular events among patients treated with statins: a meta-analysis. JAMA. 2012;307(12):1302-1309.
[5] Lemieux I, Lamarche B, Couillard C, Pascot A, Cantin B, Bergeron J, Després JP. Total cholesterol/HDL cholesterol ratio vs LDL cholesterol/HDL cholesterol ratio as indices of ischemic heart disease risk in men: the Quebec Cardiovascular Study. Arch Intern Med. 2001;161(22):2685-2692.
[6] Liu J, Sempos C, Donahue RP, Dorn J, Trevisan M, Grundy SM. Joint distribution of non-HDL and LDL cholesterol and coronary heart disease risk prediction among individuals with and without diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2005;28(8):1916-1921.
[7] Kastelein JJ, van der Steeg WA, Holme I, et al. Lipids, apolipoproteins, and their ratios in relation to cardiovascular events with statin treatment. Circulation. 2008;117(23):3002-3009.
[8] Dobiasova M, Frohlich J. The plasma parameter log (TG/HDL-C) as an atherogenic index: correlation with lipoprotein particle size and esterification rate in apoB-lipoprotein-depleted plasma (FERHDL). Clin Biochem. 2001;34(7):583-588.
[9] Assmann G, Cullen P, Schulte H. Simple scoring scheme for calculating the risk of acute coronary events based on the 10-year follow-up of the Prospective Cardiovascular Münster (PROCAM) study. Circulation. 2002;105(3):310-315.
[10] Arsenault BJ, Rana JS, Lemieux I, et al. Physical inactivity, abdominal obesity and risk of coronary heart disease in apparently healthy men and women. Int J Obes (Lond). 2010;34(2):340-347.
[11] Tanaka H, Terashima M, Shimada K, et al. Low-density lipoprotein to high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio predicts angiographic coronary artery disease in patients with normal low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels. Circ J. 2003;67(4):255-259.