Int J Sports Med 2007; 28(8): 644-649
DOI: 10.1055/s-2007-964892
Physiology & Biochemistry

© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

LDL Particle Size in Habitual Exercisers, Lean Sedentary Men and Abdominally Obese Sedentary Men

G. O'Donovan1 , J. McEneny2 , E. M. Kearney3 , A. Owen4 , A. M. Nevill5 , K. Woolf-May6 , S. R. Bird7
  • 1School of Sport and Education, Brunel University, London, United Kingdom
  • 2Department of Medicine, Queens University Belfast, Belfast, United Kingdom
  • 3Department of Clinical Biochemistry, Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother Hospital, Margate, United Kingdom
  • 4Department of Cardiology, Kent and Canterbury Hospital, Canterbury, United Kingdom
  • 5School of Sport, Performing Arts and Leisure, University of Wolverhampton, Wolverhampton, United Kingdom
  • 6Department of Sport and Exercise Science, Canterbury Christ Church University College, Canterbury, United Kingdom
  • 7Centre for Population Health in the West, Melbourne University, Melbourne, Australia
Further Information

Publication History

accepted after revision July 7, 2006

Publication Date:
13 April 2007 (online)

Zoom Image

Abstract

Habitual exercisers enjoy considerable protection from coronary heart disease (CHD). Often, however, only modest differences in traditional CHD risk factors are apparent between habitual exercisers and their sedentary counterparts. For this reason, there is increasing interest in novel predictors of CHD, such as a preponderance of small, dense low-density lipoprotein (LDL) particles. Polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis was used to separate lipoprotein subfractions in 32 lean exercisers, 36 lean sedentary men and 21 obese sedentary men aged 30 - 45 years. Well-validated equations were used to determine LDL concentration and peak particle diameter. Waist girth was used to identify lean (< 100 cm) and obese (≥ 100 cm) individuals. LDL concentration was lower in lean exercisers than in lean sedentary men (2.64 ± 0.44 vs. 3.76 ± 0.79 mmol · l-1, p < 0.001), suggesting that habitual exercise influences this risk factor. In contrast, there were no significant differences in LDL peak particle diameter between lean exercisers, lean sedentary men and obese sedentary men (27.92 ± 0.67, 28.09 ± 0.62 and 27.77 ± 0.77 nm, respectively). In multiple linear regression analysis, triglyceride concentration was the only significant predictor of LDL PPD. These data suggest that habitual exercise influences LDL concentration but does not influence LDL particle size in men aged 30 - 45 years.