Oles K S, Penry J K, Dyer R D
Department of Neurology, Bowman Gray School of Medicine, Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27103.
Ther Drug Monit. 1989;11(4):471-6.
A noninstrumented enzyme immunochromatography (EIC) method for monitoring carbamazepine using whole blood was compared to the enzyme-multiplied immunoassay technique (EMIT), fluorescence polarization immunoassay (FPIA), and high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). Samples from 74 patients were evaluated in the comparison study, yielding correlation coefficients of 0.961 (EMIT), 0.974 (FPIA), and 0.867 (HPLC). The EIC method produced within-run coefficients of variation of 4.3%, 4.9%, and 5.8% for three carbamazepine concentrations. The between-run coefficient of variation over 107 days was 4.9%. The spiked serum sample analysis yielded recovery rates ranging from 98 to 102%. Enzyme immunochromatography was found to be a useful noninstrumented method for on-site testing. The test gives quantitative patient sample results comparable to the results obtained using established laboratory methods.
将一种使用全血监测卡马西平的非仪器化酶免疫色谱法（EIC）与酶放大免疫测定技术（EMIT）、荧光偏振免疫测定法（FPIA）和高效液相色谱法（HPLC）进行了比较。在比较研究中对74例患者的样本进行了评估，得出与EMIT的相关系数为0.961，与FPIA的相关系数为0.974，与HPLC的相关系数为0.867。对于三种卡马西平浓度，EIC方法的批内变异系数分别为4.3%、4.9%和5.8%。107天内的批间变异系数为4.9%。加标血清样本分析的回收率在98%至102%之间。酶免疫色谱法被认为是一种用于现场检测的有用的非仪器化方法。该检测给出的患者样本定量结果与使用既定实验室方法获得的结果相当。
