Miksa Irina Rudik, Buckley Carol L, Poppenga Robert H
Department of Pathobiology, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, New Bolton Center, Toxicology, Kennett Square, PA 19348, USA.
J Vet Diagn Invest. 2004 Mar;16(2):139-44. doi: 10.1177/104063870401600208.
A method comparison study for the determination and quantitation of nonesterified fatty acids (NEFAs) in serum, using the commercial "NEFA C" enzymatic test kit, was performed using the spectrophotometric method recommended by the manufacturer and a modified procedure optimized for the use of a microplate reader, a 96-well microtiter plate, and small sample volumes (10 microl). Linearity, sensitivity, and precision using the test kit were determined for each method of detection. The assay was linear from 0 to 1.97 mEq/liter for both procedures, and the limits of detection were determined to be 0.22 (+/- 0.074) and 0.05 (+/- 0.002) mEq/liter for the spectrophotometer and microplate reader, respectively. Pairs of measurements for bovine serum samples were compared and evaluated by a mean difference plot method and not regression analysis, a method that has been shown to be inappropriate for method comparison studies. The difference plot was used to evaluate the systematic bias between the 2 methods. Random error is reported on the basis of SD differences, and "limits of agreement" are used to describe the maximum differences likely to occur between the 2 methods. Results suggest that the microplate reader method can be used reliably in place of the recommended spectrophotometric method. The microplate reader method is preferred because of its high throughput capabilities, simultaneous analysis of all the standards and samples, use of small sample and reagent volumes, and reduction in labor requirements and costs.
使用市售的“NEFA C”酶测试试剂盒,采用制造商推荐的分光光度法和针对酶标仪、96孔微量滴定板及小样本量(10微升)使用进行优化的改良程序,开展了一项血清中非酯化脂肪酸(NEFAs)测定和定量的方法比较研究。针对每种检测方法,测定了试剂盒的线性、灵敏度和精密度。两种程序的检测范围均为0至1.97毫当量/升,分光光度计法和酶标仪法的检测限分别确定为0.22(±0.074)和0.05(±0.002)毫当量/升。对牛血清样本的成对测量值采用平均差值图法而非回归分析法进行比较和评估,回归分析法已被证明不适用于方法比较研究。差值图用于评估两种方法之间的系统偏差。基于标准差差异报告随机误差,并使用“一致性界限”来描述两种方法之间可能出现的最大差异。结果表明,酶标仪法可可靠地替代推荐的分光光度法。酶标仪法因其高通量能力、可同时分析所有标准品和样本、使用小样本量和试剂量以及降低劳动力需求和成本而更受青睐。