Suppr超能文献

使用全自动临床化学平台对三种测定血浆总胆汁酸的酶法进行分析评估。

Analytical evaluation of three enzymatic assays for measuring total bile acids in plasma using a fully-automated clinical chemistry platform.

作者信息

Danese Elisa, Salvagno Gian Luca, Negrini Davide, Brocco Giorgio, Montagnana Martina, Lippi Giuseppe

机构信息

Section of Clinical Biochemistry, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2017 Jun 8;12(6):e0179200. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0179200. eCollection 2017.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Although the clinical significance of measuring bile acids concentration in plasma or serum has been recognized for long in patients with hepatobiliary disease and/or bile acid malabsorption, the reference separation techniques are expensive and mostly unsuitable for early diagnosis and for measuring large volumes of samples. Therefore, this study was aimed to evaluate the analytical performance of three commercial enzymatic techniques for measuring total bile acids in plasma using a fully-automated clinical chemistry platform.

METHODS

Three commercial enzymatic assays (from Diazyme, Randox and Sentinel) were adapted for use on a Cobas Roche c501. We performed imprecision and linearity studies, and we compared results with those obtained using a reference liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS) technique on an identical set of lithium-heparin plasma samples.

RESULTS

Total imprecision was optimal, always equal or lower than 3%. All assays had optimal linearity between 3-138 μmol/L. The comparison studies showed good correlation with LC-MS data (Spearman's correlation coefficients always >0.92), but all plasma samples values were significantly underestimated using the commercial enzymatic assays (-44% for Diazyme, -16% for Randox and -12% for Sentinel). The agreement at the 10 and 40 μmol/L diagnostic thresholds of total bile acids in plasma ranged between 86-92%. This discrepancy was found to be mainly attributable to a heterogeneous composition in terms of bile acids content of the three assay calibrators.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that the analytical performance of the three commercial enzymatic assays is excellent, thus confirming that automation of this important test by means of enzymatic assessment may be feasible, practical, reliable and supposedly cheap. Nevertheless, the underestimation of values compared to the reference LC-MS also suggests that the local definition and validation of reference ranges according to the combination between the specific enzymatic assay and the different clinical chemistry platforms may be advisable.

摘要

背景

尽管在肝胆疾病和/或胆汁酸吸收不良患者中,测量血浆或血清中胆汁酸浓度的临床意义早已得到认可,但传统的分离技术成本高昂,且大多不适用于早期诊断和大量样本检测。因此,本研究旨在使用全自动临床化学平台评估三种商业酶法技术检测血浆中总胆汁酸的分析性能。

方法

三种商业酶法检测试剂盒(分别来自Diazyme、Randox和Sentinel)被适配用于罗氏Cobas c501分析仪。我们进行了精密度和线性研究,并将结果与使用参考液相色谱-质谱(LC-MS)技术在同一组锂肝素血浆样本上获得的结果进行比较。

结果

总精密度最佳,始终等于或低于3%。所有检测在3 - 138 μmol/L之间具有最佳线性。比较研究显示与LC-MS数据具有良好的相关性(Spearman相关系数始终>0.92),但使用商业酶法检测时,所有血浆样本值均被显著低估(Diazyme为-44%,Randox为-16%,Sentinel为-12%)。血浆中总胆汁酸在10和40 μmol/L诊断阈值时的一致性范围在86% - 92%之间。发现这种差异主要归因于三种检测校准品在胆汁酸含量方面的异质性组成。

结论

本研究表明,三种商业酶法检测的分析性能优异,从而证实通过酶法评估实现这一重要检测的自动化可能是可行、实用、可靠且成本低廉的。然而,与参考LC-MS相比的值被低估也表明,根据特定酶法检测与不同临床化学平台的组合,对参考范围进行本地定义和验证可能是可取的。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/fc8f/5464614/1655af049122/pone.0179200.g001.jpg

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