Wigh Ida Marie Nørum, Andersen Lærke, Lundgaard Maja Hjelm, Torp Nanna Maria Uldall, Karmisholt Jesper, Andersen Stig, Andersen Stine Linding
Department of Clinical Biochemistry, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark.
Department of Clinical Medicine, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark.
Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2024 Jul;101(1):69-77. doi: 10.1111/cen.15062. Epub 2024 Apr 17.
Thyroid function tests are common biochemical analyses, and agreement between the routinely used immunoassays is important for diagnosis and monitoring of thyroid disease. Efforts are continuously made to align the biochemical assays, and we aimed to evaluate the agreement between immunoassays used in a clinical laboratory setting among non-pregnant and pregnant adults.
Cross-sectional study.
Serum samples were obtained from 192 blood donors (non-pregnant adults) and from 86 pregnant women in the North Denmark Region with no known thyroid disease.
Each sample was used for measurement of thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) with the routinely used automatic immunoassays in the regional Departments of Clinical Biochemistry (Alinity, Abbott Laboratories, Cobas, Roche Diagnostics, and Atellica, Siemens Healthineers) and reported as the median with 95% confidence interval (95% CI).
In nonpregnant adults, the level of TSH was higher with Cobas and Atellica than with Alinity as reflected by median (Alinity: 1.39 mIU/L (95% CI: 1.30-1.51 mIU/L); Cobas: 1.57 mIU/L (95% CI: 1.48-1.75 mIU/L); Atellica: 1.74 mIU/L (95% CI: 1.61-1.83 mIU/L)). Similarly, a trend was seen towards higher median TSH with Cobas than with Alinity among pregnant women (Alinity: 1.90 mIU/L (95% CI: 1.37-2.82 mIU/L); Cobas: 2.33 mIU/L (95% CI: 1.69-3.62 mIU/L)).
Results of thyroid function tests obtained with different immunoassays were not interchangeable when evaluated among pregnant and non-pregnant adults. The distinct differences are relevant for clinical decision making and emphasize the necessity of clinical laboratory information when different assays are used for diagnosis and monitoring of patients with thyroid disease.
甲状腺功能测试是常见的生化分析,常规使用的免疫测定法之间的一致性对于甲状腺疾病的诊断和监测至关重要。人们一直在努力使生化测定法保持一致,我们旨在评估临床实验室环境中用于非孕妇和孕妇的免疫测定法之间的一致性。
横断面研究。
从丹麦北部地区192名献血者(非孕妇)和86名无已知甲状腺疾病的孕妇中获取血清样本。
每个样本用于通过地区临床生化部门常规使用的自动免疫测定法测量促甲状腺激素(TSH)(Alinity、雅培实验室、Cobas、罗氏诊断公司和Atellica,西门子医疗),并报告为中位数及95%置信区间(95%CI)。
在非孕妇中,Cobas和Atellica检测的TSH水平高于Alinity,中位数反映如下(Alinity:1.39 mIU/L(95%CI:1.30 - 1.51 mIU/L);Cobas:1.57 mIU/L(95%CI:1.48 - 1.75 mIU/L);Atellica:1.74 mIU/L(95%CI:1.61 - 1.83 mIU/L))。同样,孕妇中也观察到Cobas检测的TSH中位数有高于Alinity的趋势(Alinity:1.90 mIU/L(95%CI:1.37 - 2.82 mIU/L);Cobas:2.33 mIU/L(95%CI:1.69 - 3.62 mIU/L))。
在孕妇和非孕妇中评估时,不同免疫测定法获得的甲状腺功能测试结果不可互换。这些明显差异与临床决策相关,并强调在使用不同测定法诊断和监测甲状腺疾病患者时临床实验室信息的必要性。