Suppr超能文献

糖化血红蛋白 A1c:三种即时检测分析仪与中心实验室方法的评估比较。

Hemoglobin A1c: assessment of three POC analyzers relative to a central laboratory method.

机构信息

Department of Pathology, University of Texas Medical Branch, United States.

出版信息

Clin Chim Acta. 2010 Dec 14;411(23-24):2062-6. doi: 10.1016/j.cca.2010.09.004. Epub 2010 Sep 8.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Glycosylated hemoglobin evaluation is very important for assessing the control of diabetes. Since the use of point-of-care (POC) devices for monitoring HbA1c is increasing, it is important to determine how these devices compare in relation to instrumentation used in the central laboratory (CL).

METHODS

Eighty-eight randomly selected samples previously analyzed using the Bio-Rad Variant™ II Hemoglobin Testing System were run on three POC Analyzers (Siemens DCA Vantage™ Analyzer, Axis-Shield Afinion™ AS100 Analyzer, and Bio-Rad In2it™ Analyzer).

RESULTS

All POC instruments showed good correlation to the CL method (R(2)>0.95 for all methods). HbA1c levels obtained using Variant II (mean=7.9; 95% CI=7.5-8.3%) and In2it (mean=7.9; 95% C.I.=7.5-8.2%) instruments were found to have no statistical mean difference (p=0.21), while the values obtained using DCA Vantage (mean=7.2% C.I.=6.9-7.5%) and Afinion (mean=7.3% C.I.=7.0-7.6%) instruments were different (p<0.001) from those of the CL method. The Afinion and DCA Vantage instruments increasingly underestimated the HbA1c compared to the CL as the HbA1c values increased. These differences were even more striking when the estimated average glucose is calculated.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite significant variation of results among the POC instruments evaluated relative to the CL method and pending resolution of HbA1c standardization issues, we conclude that all of the POC instruments can be used for HbA1c determination if clinicians are given instrument specific reference ranges.

摘要

背景

糖化血红蛋白的评估对于评估糖尿病的控制非常重要。由于即时检测(POC)设备在监测 HbA1c 方面的应用越来越多,因此确定这些设备与中心实验室(CL)使用的仪器相比如何非常重要。

方法

对先前使用 Bio-Rad Variant™ II 血红蛋白检测系统分析的 88 个随机样本在三个 POC 分析仪(西门子 DCA Vantage™分析仪、Axis-Shield Afinion™ AS100 分析仪和 Bio-Rad In2it™分析仪)上进行了检测。

结果

所有 POC 仪器均与 CL 方法具有良好的相关性(所有方法的 R(2)>0.95)。使用 Variant II(平均值=7.9;95%置信区间=7.5-8.3%)和 In2it(平均值=7.9;95%置信区间=7.5-8.2%)仪器获得的 HbA1c 水平没有统计学上的均值差异(p=0.21),而使用 DCA Vantage(平均值=7.2%,置信区间=6.9-7.5%)和 Afinion(平均值=7.3%,置信区间=7.0-7.6%)仪器获得的数值与 CL 方法不同(p<0.001)。随着 HbA1c 值的增加,Afinion 和 DCA Vantage 仪器与 CL 相比越来越低估 HbA1c。当计算估计平均血糖时,这些差异更加明显。

结论

尽管与 CL 方法相比,评估的 POC 仪器的结果存在显著差异,且 HbA1c 标准化问题仍有待解决,但我们得出结论,如果临床医生获得特定仪器的参考范围,则所有 POC 仪器都可用于 HbA1c 测定。

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