von Mach Marc-A, Weber Carola, Meyer Markus R, Weilemann Ludwig S, Maurer Hans H, Peters Frank T
Division of Clinical Toxicology and Poison Center, II Medical Department, University of Mainz, Mainz, Germany.
Ther Drug Monit. 2007 Feb;29(1):27-39. doi: 10.1097/FTD.0b013e31802bb2aa.
On-site tests based on immunoassay techniques are widely used for toxicologic screening analysis in patients with suspected poisoning. However, such assays usually have been validated using urine samples with known concentrations of the investigated substances. In the present investigation, on-site screening results were evaluated in a clinical setting. This was a retrospective study of patients with suspected poisoning from January to December 2003 in the emergency department of a tertiary urban hospital. Urine samples were analyzed using the Triage 8 panel and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS). A total of 111 patients were included (54 female, 57 male; average age 37.8 +/- 19.7 years). A total of 3.8% of the patients showed no symptoms, 45.2% minor, 24.0% moderate, and 26.9% serious symptoms. In 50 patients (45.0%), Triage 8 results corresponded well with GC-MS results. In 17 patients (15.3%), the Triage 8 results were confirmed by GC-MS, but additional substances were determined that could not be detected by the Triage 8 panel. A completely negative Triage 8 screening result was obtained in 23 patients (20.7%) who showed toxicologically relevant findings in GC-MS. In 21 patients (18.9%), Triage 8 results could not be confirmed by GC-MS. The analysis of the results in view of the patients' medical histories revealed that in 20 patients (18.0%), no relevant toxic substance could be detected. Additionally, 8 patients (7.2%) showed intoxication with alcohol, which could not be detected by the presently applied toxicologic screening investigations. On-site screening results in suspected poisoning were not very helpful in the present study because practically every second patient ingested substances that were not detectable by the Triage 8 device. In addition, every fifth result was not in line with GC-MS findings. On-site test findings should be interpreted very carefully, and in critical cases, a GC-MS screening should be performed.
基于免疫分析技术的现场检测被广泛用于疑似中毒患者的毒理学筛查分析。然而,此类检测通常使用含有已知浓度被测物质的尿液样本进行验证。在本研究中,对现场筛查结果进行了临床评估。这是一项对2003年1月至12月在一家城市三级医院急诊科疑似中毒患者的回顾性研究。使用Triage 8检测板和气相色谱 - 质谱联用仪(GC - MS)对尿液样本进行分析。共纳入111例患者(女性54例,男性57例;平均年龄37.8±19.7岁)。3.8%的患者无症状,45.2%为轻度症状,24.0%为中度症状,26.9%为重度症状。50例患者(45.0%)的Triage 8检测结果与GC - MS结果相符。17例患者(15.3%)的Triage 8检测结果被GC - MS证实,但还检测出了Triage 8检测板无法检测到的其他物质。23例患者(20.7%)的Triage 8筛查结果完全为阴性,但在GC - MS检测中发现了毒理学相关结果。21例患者(18.9%)的Triage 8检测结果未被GC - MS证实。根据患者病史对结果进行分析发现,20例患者(18.0%)未检测到相关有毒物质。此外,8例患者(7.2%)存在酒精中毒,目前应用的毒理学筛查检测无法检测到。在本研究中,疑似中毒的现场筛查结果帮助不大,因为实际上每两名患者中就有一名摄入了Triage 8设备无法检测到的物质。此外,每五个结果中就有一个与GC - MS检测结果不符。现场检测结果应非常谨慎地解读,在关键病例中,应进行GC - MS筛查。