Bandi Z L, Myers J L, Bee D E, James G P
Clin Chem. 1982 Oct;28(10):2110-5.
Four commercial products for urine glucose determination were evaluated and compared with a quantitative hexokinase procedure. We examined precision, sensitivity, and analytical recovery of glucose from glucose-supplemented urine samples and comparison of methods, using patients' samples. Only "Chemstrip uG" (Bio-Dynamics Inc.) could differentiate between 0.3 g/L (upper limit of normal) and 0.6 g/L urine glucose concentrations. "Tes-Tape" (Lilly) and "Diastix" (Ames) gave positive readings at 0.3 g/L; "Clinitest" (Ames) detected glucose only over 1 g/L. Analytical recovery of glucose was best, for all four products, between 1 and 2.5 g/L; Chemstrip uG was the most nearly accurate among the four. Between 5 and 20 g/L glucose concentrations, Tes-Tape, Diastix, and Clinitest tended to give falsely low results; the use of Chemstrip uG resulted in overestimates of concentration at 20 g of glucose per liter. Only Chemistrip uG and Clinitest (two-drop method) had linear ranges extending to 50 g/L; Chemstrip uG had better precision and accuracy at this concentration. Of the four products, Chemstrip uG had the lowest within-technologist and technologist-to-technologist random analytical errors. In method comparison on patients' samples, Chemstrip uG was significantly stronger in its association with the quantitative hexokinase method than was Diastix, Clinitest, or Tes-Tape.
对四种用于测定尿糖的商业产品进行了评估，并与定量己糖激酶法进行了比较。我们检测了补充葡萄糖的尿液样本中葡萄糖的精密度、灵敏度和分析回收率，并使用患者样本对方法进行了比较。只有“Chemstrip uG”（生物动力学公司）能够区分0.3 g/L（正常上限）和0.6 g/L的尿糖浓度。“Tes-Tape”（礼来公司）和“Diastix”（艾姆斯公司）在0.3 g/L时给出阳性读数；“Clinitest”（艾姆斯公司）仅在超过1 g/L时检测到葡萄糖。对于所有四种产品，葡萄糖的分析回收率在1至2.5 g/L之间最佳；Chemstrip uG在这四种产品中最接近准确值。在5至20 g/L的葡萄糖浓度范围内，Tes-Tape、Diastix和Clinitest往往给出错误的低结果；使用Chemstrip uG会导致每升20克葡萄糖时浓度高估。只有Chemistrip uG和Clinitest（两滴法）的线性范围扩展到50 g/L；Chemstrip uG在该浓度下具有更好的精密度和准确度。在这四种产品中，Chemstrip uG在技术人员内部和技术人员之间的随机分析误差最低。在对患者样本的方法比较中，Chemstrip uG与定量己糖激酶法的相关性明显强于Diastix、Clinitest或Tes-Tape。
