Suppr超能文献

酶法总胆汁酸(TBA)常规检测的性能评估:五种第五代TBA循环法的系统比较及其从HPLC-MS/MS参考方法中各自的胆汁酸回收率

Performance evaluation of enzymatic total bile acid (TBA) routine assays: systematic comparison of five fifth-generation TBA cycling methods and their individual bile acid recovery from HPLC-MS/MS reference.

作者信息

Grimmler Matthias, Frömel Tobias, Masetto Angelique, Müller Holger, Leber Tina, Peter Christoph

机构信息

Institute for Biomolecular Research, Hochschulen Fresenius gemeinnützige Trägergesellschaft mbH, University of Applied Sciences, Idstein, Germany.

DiaSys Diagnostic Systems GmbH, Holzheim, Germany.

出版信息

Clin Chem Lab Med. 2024 Nov 29;63(4):753-763. doi: 10.1515/cclm-2024-1029. Print 2025 Mar 26.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Serum total bile acid (TBA) levels are frequently assessed in clinical routine for the early detection of hepatobiliary dysfunction. However, the comparability of current 5th-generation TBA cycle assays based on 3α-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase (3α-HSD) and their ability to quantify individual bile acids has not been systematically addressed.

METHODS

Patient serum samples (n=60) across the diagnostically relevant TBA range (1-200 μmol/L) were analyzed using five TBA routine assays from Abbott, DiaSys, Diazyme, Beijing Strong (BSBE) and Randox on the same analyzer (BioMajesty JCA-BM6010/C). The assays were compared using Passing-Bablok regression and the recovery of 11 individual BAs was evaluated against RP-HPLC-MS/MS as non-enzymatic reference method.

RESULTS

Despite excellent correlation (Spearman r ≥0.99), the assays showed proportional differences (slope) ranging from 0.99 (BSBE/Randox) to 1.24 (Abbott/DiaSys). The assays showed considerable deviation in the recovery of competitor's calibrators and controls, and large heterogeneity in the recovery of individual BAs, with mean deviations from reference value between 13 % (DiaSys) and 42 % (Abbott). CA and TCA were measured most accurately and consistently, whereas GCA, CDCA, DCA, UDCA, and conjugates were over- or undermeasured to varying degrees.

CONCLUSIONS

The linear relationship and constant proportional bias between all five routine assays enable the harmonization of TBA measurements up to 60 μmol/L. However, for patient samples with high TBA levels and disease-specific overrepresentation of individual BAs, harmonization will require: i) optimized reaction conditions to equalize substrate specificity, and ii) calibration to a common, commutable reference material with well-defined BA composition instead of internal standards spiked with different BAs.

摘要

目的

在临床常规检查中,经常检测血清总胆汁酸(TBA)水平以早期发现肝胆功能障碍。然而,目前基于3α-羟基类固醇脱氢酶(3α-HSD)的第5代TBA循环检测方法的可比性及其对单个胆汁酸的定量能力尚未得到系统研究。

方法

使用雅培、迪雅斯、迪阿兹姆、北京强微(BSBE)和兰道克斯的五种TBA常规检测方法,在同一分析仪(BioMajesty JCA-BM6010/C)上对诊断相关TBA范围内(1-200μmol/L)的60份患者血清样本进行分析。使用帕辛-巴布洛赫回归法比较这些检测方法,并以反相高效液相色谱-串联质谱法(RP-HPLC-MS/MS)作为非酶参考方法评估11种单个胆汁酸的回收率。

结果

尽管相关性极佳(斯皮尔曼r≥0.99),但这些检测方法的比例差异(斜率)在0.99(BSBE/兰道克斯)至1.24(雅培/迪雅斯)之间。这些检测方法在竞争对手校准品和对照品的回收率方面存在显著偏差,并且在单个胆汁酸的回收率方面存在很大异质性,与参考值的平均偏差在13%(迪雅斯)至42%(雅培)之间。胆酸(CA)和鹅去氧胆酸(TCA)的测量最为准确和一致,而甘氨胆酸(GCA)、鹅脱氧胆酸(CDCA)、脱氧胆酸(DCA)、熊去氧胆酸(UDCA)及其结合物则存在不同程度的测量过度或不足。

结论

所有五种常规检测方法之间的线性关系和恒定比例偏差使得在TBA水平高达60μmol/L时能够实现TBA测量的标准化。然而,对于TBA水平较高且单个胆汁酸在疾病中过度表达的患者样本,标准化将需要:i)优化反应条件以平衡底物特异性,ii)校准到具有明确胆汁酸组成的通用、可互换参考物质,而不是添加不同胆汁酸的内标。

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