Suppr超能文献

伊朗各种糖化血红蛋白检测方法的比较分析性能

Comparative Analytical Performance of Various HbA1c Assays in Iran.

作者信息

Razi Farideh, Rahnamaye Farzami Marjan, Ebrahimi Soltan Ahmad, Nahid Mehrzad, Bigdeli Mostafa Gholi, Sheidaei Ali, Ghasemian Anoosheh, Tootee Ali, Keramati Tahereh, Nasli Esfahani Ensieh, Larijani Bagher, Pasalar Parvin

机构信息

Diabetes Research Center, Endocrinology and Metabolism Clinical Sciences Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

Reference Health Laboratory of Iran, Ministry of Health, Tehran, Iran.

出版信息

Arch Iran Med. 2016 Jun;19(6):414-9.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) measurement devices are widely used to evaluate glycemic control in diabetic patients. The aim of this study was to investigate the comparability of various HbA1c instruments used in Iran.

METHODS

In the present study, 154 fresh whole blood samples from diabetic patients, with different HbA1c levels (4.0%-10%) and no types of hemoglobinopathy were analyzed by six HbA1c assays including one high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) method (D10 HbA1c), two immunoassay methods (COBAS INTEGRA 400 and Pars Azmoon kit), one Boronate affinity method (Nycocard Reader II), and two ion exchange methods (Biosystems and DS5). The two National Glycohemoglobin Standardization Programs (NGSP) certified system, D10 and COBAS INTEGRA 400 which are certified as secondary reference measurement procedures, were considered as reference methods. The CLSI document (EP9-A2) - Method comparison and Bias estimation using patient samples, approved guideline - was used to compare the performance of different HbA1c instruments.

RESULTS

The mean of HbA1c in all four types of assays was less than the reference methods (P-value < 0.01).The mean of absolute difference between the reference methods was the least (0.11%). Among the other four tests, Biosystems had the smallest mean of difference (-0.21%), while Pars Azmoon had the highest (-1.18%). Pars Azmoon showed the greatest difference (95% confidence interval) when compared to D10 [-15.5%(-5.7%to -25.3%)] and COBAS INTEGRA [-17% (-9.16% to -24.84%)]. The highest regression slope (B) was found in DS5 method (0.96) in regression model with both reference methods.

CONCLUSION

It can be concluded that although HbA1c standardization programs have resulted in great improvements in the comparability of HbA1c assays, unacceptable errors still exist and further national and international projects are required for standardization of HbA1c measurement. In this situation, it is recommended to use the same laboratory for HbA1c measurement to monitor diabetic patients.

摘要

引言

糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)检测设备被广泛用于评估糖尿病患者的血糖控制情况。本研究的目的是调查伊朗使用的各种HbA1c检测仪器的可比性。

方法

在本研究中,对154份来自糖尿病患者的新鲜全血样本进行分析,这些样本的HbA1c水平不同(4.0%-10%)且无血红蛋白病类型。采用六种HbA1c检测方法进行分析,包括一种高效液相色谱法(HPLC)(D10 HbA1c)、两种免疫分析法(COBAS INTEGRA 400和Pars Azmoon试剂盒)、一种硼酸盐亲和法(Nycocard Reader II)以及两种离子交换法(Biosystems和DS5)。两种获得国家糖化血红蛋白标准化计划(NGSP)认证的系统,即被认证为二级参考测量程序的D10和COBAS INTEGRA 400,被视为参考方法。使用CLSI文件(EP9-A2)——使用患者样本进行方法比较和偏差估计,批准指南——来比较不同HbA1c检测仪器的性能。

结果

所有四种检测方法的HbA1c平均值均低于参考方法(P值<0.01)。参考方法之间的平均绝对差值最小(0.11%)。在其他四项检测中,Biosystems的平均差值最小(-0.21%),而Pars Azmoon的平均差值最高(-1.18%)。与D10 [-15.5%(-5.7%至-25.3%)]和COBAS INTEGRA [-17%(-9.16%至-24.84%)]相比,Pars Azmoon显示出最大差异(95%置信区间)。在与两种参考方法的回归模型中,DS5方法的回归斜率(B)最高(0.96)。

结论

可以得出结论,尽管HbA1c标准化计划已使HbA1c检测的可比性有了很大提高,但仍存在不可接受的误差,需要进一步开展国家和国际项目来实现HbA1c测量的标准化。在这种情况下,建议使用同一实验室进行HbA1c测量以监测糖尿病患者。

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