McWhorter Valerie C, Ford Lynne C, Butch Anthony W
Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, 10833 Le Conte Ave, Mailroom A7-149 CHS, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1732, USA.
Clin Chim Acta. 2004 Sep;347(1-2):71-9. doi: 10.1016/j.cccn.2004.03.034.
C-reactive protein (CRP) can provide valuable prognostic information for risk of cardiovascular events. Several automated high sensitivity CRP immunoassays are currently available for risk assessment.
The analytical performance of the Synchron LX20 Pro, BN II and IMMAGE high sensitivity CRP assays were evaluated and concordance within cardiovascular risk tertiles was examined for 529 serum samples.
All three assays exhibited satisfactory between-run imprecision based on CVs< or =9.0% over a wide range of CRP concentrations. The LX20 Pro and BN II were linear over an extensive measuring range, whereas the IMMAGE exhibited a slight deviation from linearity producing results with a positive bias at CRP levels between 0.7 and 2.6 mg/l. Moderately hemolyzed samples interfered with the LX20 Pro and IMMAGE CRP assays, whereas moderate lipemia interfered with the BN II. Correlation studies revealed that the LX20 Pro and IMMAGE produced results 8.2% lower and 5.1% lower, respectively, compared with the BN II. There was good agreement among methods for cardiovascular risk assessment.
All three CRP assays exhibited acceptable analytical performance for cardiovascular risk assessment. Although results by the LX20 Pro and IMMAGE were lower than the BN II, there was good agreement within each cardiovascular risk assessment tertile.
C反应蛋白(CRP)可为心血管事件风险提供有价值的预后信息。目前有几种自动化高敏CRP免疫测定法可用于风险评估。
评估了Synchron LX20 Pro、BN II和IMMAGE高敏CRP测定法的分析性能,并对529份血清样本在心血管风险三分位数内的一致性进行了检查。
在广泛的CRP浓度范围内,基于CVs≤9.0%,所有三种测定法均表现出令人满意的批间不精密度。LX20 Pro和BN II在广泛的测量范围内呈线性,而IMMAGE在CRP水平为0.7至2.6 mg/l之间时与线性略有偏差,产生的结果有正偏差。中度溶血样本干扰LX20 Pro和IMMAGE CRP测定法,而中度脂血干扰BN II。相关性研究表明,与BN II相比,LX20 Pro和IMMAGE产生的结果分别低8.2%和5.1%。在心血管风险评估方法之间存在良好的一致性。
所有三种CRP测定法在心血管风险评估中均表现出可接受的分析性能。虽然LX20 Pro和IMMAGE的结果低于BN II,但在每个心血管风险评估三分位数内存在良好的一致性。