Suppr超能文献

用美国临床化学协会参考测量程序评估四种血清总蛋白双缩脲试剂试剂盒。

Evaluation of four commercial biuret reagent kits of serum total protein by the American Association for Clinical Chemistry reference measurement procedure.

机构信息

Department of Laboratory Medicine, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, P.R. China.

出版信息

Clin Chem Lab Med. 2011 Jun;49(6):989-92. doi: 10.1515/CCLM.2011.153. Epub 2011 Mar 11.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

In China, the traceability of clinical chemistry methods is still immature. Therefore, it is necessary to establish a reference measurement procedure and evaluate commercial reagent kits using such established procedures.

METHODS

We reproduced the reference measurement procedure for serum total protein, as recommended by the American Association for Clinical Chemistry (AACC). We evaluated the performance by Clinical Laboratory Standard Institute (CLSI) guidelines EP15-A and EP6-A. Subsequently, four commercial reagent kits were evaluated by the reproduced reference procedure following CLSI guideline EP9-A2.

RESULTS

The performance of the reproduced reference procedure was as follows: CVs ranged from 0.47% to 0.85% at medical decision levels (X(c)) of 45 g/L, 60 g/L and 80 g/L. Linearity was Y=1.0022X-0.2121 (r=0.9999), and recovery ranged from 100.2% to 102.4%. The External Quality Assessment Scheme for Reference Laboratories in Laboratory Medicine (RELA) was applied, and the result was within the limit of equivalence. The linear relationships of four commercial reagent kits, Merit Choice, KHB, Leadman, and Olympus, were, respectively: Y=0.9922X+0.5776 (r=0.9961); Y=0.9936X+0.4316 (r=0.9992); Y=0.9949X+0.9129 (r=0.9987) and Y=0.9923X+0.8876 (r=0.9989). KHB showed slight negative bias, and the mean±SD was -0.03±0.60 g/L. Merit Choice, Leadman, and Olympus all showed positive bias, and the mean±SDs were 0.02±0.63 g/L, 0.55±0.77 g/L and 0.34±0.71 g/L, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The correlation and bias of four commercial reagent kits for serum total protein were found to be acceptable. Thus, these reagent kits can be used reliably in China.

摘要

背景

在中国,临床化学方法的溯源仍不成熟。因此,有必要建立参考测量程序,并使用这种已建立的程序来评估商业试剂试剂盒。

方法

我们按照美国临床化学协会(AACC)的建议复制了血清总蛋白的参考测量程序。我们按照临床实验室标准化协会(CLSI)指南 EP15-A 和 EP6-A 来评估性能。随后,根据 CLSI 指南 EP9-A2,使用复制的参考程序评估了四个商业试剂试剂盒。

结果

复制的参考程序的性能如下:在 45 g/L、60 g/L 和 80 g/L 的医学决策水平(X(c))下,CV 范围为 0.47%至 0.85%。线性关系为 Y=1.0022X-0.2121(r=0.9999),回收率范围为 100.2%至 102.4%。应用了实验室医学参考实验室外部质量评估计划(RELA),结果在等效范围内。四个商业试剂试剂盒,Merit Choice、KHB、Leadman 和 Olympus 的线性关系分别为:Y=0.9922X+0.5776(r=0.9961);Y=0.9936X+0.4316(r=0.9992);Y=0.9949X+0.9129(r=0.9987)和 Y=0.9923X+0.8876(r=0.9989)。KHB 显示出轻微的负偏倚,平均值±SD 为-0.03±0.60 g/L。Merit Choice、Leadman 和 Olympus 均显示出正偏倚,平均值±SD 分别为 0.02±0.63 g/L、0.55±0.77 g/L 和 0.34±0.71 g/L。

结论

发现四个用于血清总蛋白的商业试剂试剂盒的相关性和偏差是可以接受的。因此,这些试剂试剂盒在中国可以可靠使用。

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