OBJECTIVES: To compare two different analytical methods for determination of small dense LDL and to determine a share of corresponding and non-corresponding (inconsistent) results METHODS: In the group of 104 hyperlipidemic patients and 20 healthy individuals of the control group we analysed the total cholesterol and triglycerides by enzymatic CHOD PAP method (Roche Diagnostics, Germany) in EDTA-K2 plasma. Small dense LDL (sdLDL) were quantified by the electrophoretic method for lipoprotein analysis on polyacrylamide gel (PAG) (Lipoprint LDL System, Quantimetrix, CA, USA) and simultaneously, the small dense LDL concentrations in the indentical samples were analysed by an enzymatic method LDL-EX ´Seiken´(Randox, England). RESULTS: In 31 patients we found the discrepancy in the sdLDL levels using the two different procedures. Out of them, 24 patients tested by enzymatic method ´SEIKEN´ had higher sdLDL values (more than 0.9 mmol/l) compared to the Lipoprint LDL results, which identified normal sdLDL values in the same samples (in 23% of tested patients). In 7 patients out of the 31 tested patients with discrepant sdLDL values, the Lipoprint LDL identified increased values of plasma sdLDL (more than 0.155 mmol/l), while the enzymatic LDL-EX Seiken did not find an increased concentration of sdLDL (in 7% of tested patients). In the control group a discrepancy in the sdLDL results between the two tested analytical methods was not found. CONCLUSION: The concentration of sdLDL in plasma lipoprotein spectrum obtained by two different laboratory procedures was analysed, compared, evaluated and 70% identical corresponding results have been confirmed.