Suppr超能文献

在CEDIA和FPIA环孢素免疫测定中,肝素化血液与EDTA提供的结果相当,从而便于进行常规的环孢素测定。

Heparinized blood provides equivalent results to EDTA in the CEDIA and FPIA cyclosporine immunoassays, thus facilitating routine cyclosporine determination.

作者信息

Korte Wolfgang C, Engler Hanna, Aldebert Eva, Riesen Walter F

机构信息

Institute for Clinical Chemistry and Haematology, Kantonsspital, CH-9007 St. Gallen, Switzerland.

出版信息

Clin Chim Acta. 2008 Apr;390(1-2):138-40. doi: 10.1016/j.cca.2007.12.021. Epub 2008 Jan 12.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

CsA measurements are routinely used to allow adequate CsA dosage adjustments. CsA assays routinely require EDTA anticoagulated whole blood; EDTA has been preferred due to differences seen when using heparinized blood in the past. We hypothesized that with new, robust assays, heparinized blood might be appropriate for measuring CsA levels.

METHODS

CsA levels from EDTA samples and heparinized samples were compared using the CEDIA assay on a BeckmanCoulter DXC. Also, CsA levels from heparinized blood were compared using the CEDIA assay (BeckmanCoulter) and the FPIA assay (Abbott Axsym).

RESULTS

CsA levels from EDTA blood (x) and heparinized blood (y, n=81) showed very good correlation without deviation from linearity by Passing-Bablok analysis (y=-2.4524+1.0210x). In 187 samples obtained from heparinized blood, CsA levels determined by using the CEDIA assay (x) or the FPIA assay (y) also correlated equally well by Passing-Bablok analysis (y=6.1922+1.0221x), also without deviation from linearity.

CONCLUSION

CsA determination from heparinized blood is easy to perform and accurate with the two assays described and evaluated. Using heparinized blood reduces handling time as well as hands on time. We suggest that this methodology be formally evaluated by the manufacturers for inclusion into CE labelling of their products to allow improved laboratory work flow.

摘要

背景

环孢素A(CsA)检测常用于进行适当的CsA剂量调整。CsA检测通常需要乙二胺四乙酸(EDTA)抗凝全血;由于过去使用肝素化血液时出现的差异,EDTA一直是首选。我们推测,对于新的、可靠的检测方法,肝素化血液可能适合用于测量CsA水平。

方法

使用贝克曼库尔特DXC上的微粒酶免疫分析(CEDIA)检测法比较EDTA样本和肝素化样本中的CsA水平。此外,还使用CEDIA检测法(贝克曼库尔特)和荧光偏振免疫分析(FPIA)检测法(雅培AxSym)比较了肝素化血液中的CsA水平。

结果

通过帕氏-巴布洛克分析,EDTA血样(x)和肝素化血样(y,n = 81)中的CsA水平显示出非常好的相关性,且无偏离线性(y = -2.4524 + 1.0210x)。在从肝素化血液中获取的187个样本中,通过帕氏-巴布洛克分析,使用CEDIA检测法(x)或FPIA检测法(y)测定的CsA水平也具有同样良好的相关性(y = 6.1922 + 1.0221x),同样无偏离线性。

结论

使用所述并经评估的两种检测方法,从肝素化血液中测定CsA易于操作且准确。使用肝素化血液可减少处理时间以及实际操作时间。我们建议制造商对这种方法进行正式评估,以便将其纳入产品的CE标识,从而改善实验室工作流程。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验