Suppr超能文献

鲎试剂(LAL)检测与兔检测的比较:假阳性和假阴性

Comparison of the limulus amebocyte lysate (LAL) test with the rabbit test: false positives and false negatives.

作者信息

van Noordwijk J, de Jong Y

出版信息

Dev Biol Stand. 1977;34:39-43.

PMID:838148
Abstract

Although the test for pyrogens on rabbits, described by the European Pharmacopoeia, is efficient for the detection of clinically important concentrations of pyrogens, it has some practical disadvantages; for instance, it blocks the further use of a rabbit for three weeks once this has been used to test a solution which proved to contain pyrogens. The LAL test for bacterial endotoxin lipopolysaccharides was explored as an alternative method for the detection of pyrogens in infusion fluids and medicinal preparations. False negatives in the LAL test were obtained on some corticosteroid preparations and on some infusion fluids from a batch which had caused febrile reactions in the clinic.

摘要

尽管欧洲药典中描述的家兔热原检测方法对于检测具有临床意义的热原浓度很有效,但它存在一些实际缺点;例如,一旦用兔子检测出某溶液含有热原,该兔子在三周内就不能再用于其他检测。于是探索采用鲎试剂法检测细菌内毒素脂多糖,作为检测输液和药物制剂中热原的替代方法。在一些皮质类固醇制剂以及一批曾在临床引起发热反应的输液中,鲎试剂法检测出现了假阴性结果。

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