Suppr超能文献

使用流式细胞术和免疫磁珠检测及定量成熟循环内皮细胞:方法学比较

Detection and quantification of mature circulating endothelial cells using flow cytometry and immunomagnetic beads: a methodological comparison.

作者信息

Goon Patrick K Y, Boos Christopher J, Stonelake Paul S, Blann Andrew D, Lip Gregory Y H

机构信息

Haemostasis Thrombosis and Vascular Biology Unit, City Hospital, Dudley Road, Birmingham, B18 7QH, United Kingdom.

出版信息

Thromb Haemost. 2006 Jul;96(1):45-52. doi: 10.1160/TH06-04-0185.

Abstract

Mature circulating endothelial cells (CECs) are novel cellular markers of endothelial damage/dysfunction. The two main techniques of CEC enumeration are flow cytometry (FC) and immunomagnetic bead (IB) isolation. Both quantify CECs accurately, but a direct comparison of both methods has not been reported. We sought to assess the agreement between the two methods in two patient populations, and a group of healthy subjects, with emphasis given to methodological issues. We included 34 patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS), 60 patients with primary breast cancer (PBC) and 30 healthy controls (HC). We quantified CECs using the IB method [CD146 and FITCUlex europaeus lectin-1] and FC [CD45, CD34 and CD146]. Bland-Altman plots suggested reasonable agreement (<5% of events >2 standard deviations from the mean) between FC and the IB methods for CEC quantification in whole blood in the two disease groups (ACS and PBC), but not among the HCs. There were no statistically significant differences in CEC levels by the two methods amongst all three patient groups. There is reasonable agreement between the FC and the IB methods for mature CEC quantification in whole blood, especially amongst disease groups. The agreement between the two methods appears to weaken in healthy controls, and at lower and higher absolute CEC counts.

摘要

成熟循环内皮细胞(CECs)是内皮损伤/功能障碍的新型细胞标志物。CEC计数的两种主要技术是流式细胞术(FC)和免疫磁珠(IB)分离法。两种方法都能准确地对CECs进行定量,但尚未有两种方法的直接比较报道。我们试图评估这两种方法在两组患者群体以及一组健康受试者中的一致性,并重点关注方法学问题。我们纳入了34例急性冠状动脉综合征(ACS)患者、60例原发性乳腺癌(PBC)患者和30例健康对照(HC)。我们使用IB方法[CD146和异硫氰酸荧光素标记的欧洲荚莲凝集素-1]和FC方法[CD45、CD34和CD146]对CECs进行定量。布兰德-奥特曼图表明,在两个疾病组(ACS和PBC)的全血中,FC方法和IB方法在CEC定量方面具有合理的一致性(<5%的事件偏离均值>2个标准差),但在健康对照中并非如此。在所有三个患者组中,两种方法测得的CEC水平无统计学显著差异。FC方法和IB方法在全血中对成熟CEC的定量具有合理的一致性,尤其是在疾病组中。两种方法之间的一致性在健康对照以及较低和较高的绝对CEC计数时似乎会减弱。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验