...
首页> 外文期刊>Scandinavian journal of clinical and laboratory investigation. >Comparison between ADVIA Chemistry systems Enzymatic Creatinine-2 method and ADVIA Chemistry systems Creatinine method (kinetic Jaffe method) for determining creatinine
【24h】

Comparison between ADVIA Chemistry systems Enzymatic Creatinine-2 method and ADVIA Chemistry systems Creatinine method (kinetic Jaffe method) for determining creatinine

机译:ADVIA化学系统酶法肌酐2法与ADVIA化学系统肌酐法(动力学Jaffe法)测定肌酐的比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Objective. The aim of this study was two-fold: Firstly, to compare the serum creatinine concentration measured by enzymatic method and uncompensated kinetic Jaffe method, and secondly, to compare the effects of certain interfering substances such as glucose, bilirubin, proteins, triglycerides and hemoglobin on creatinine measurement. Methods. The determination of serum creatinine concentrations by enzymatic method and uncompensated kinetic Jaffe method was performed on ADVIA? 2400 analyzer. The interfering substances were tested by adding solutions of interference to serum pool with low (62 μmol/L), medium (221 μmol/L) and elevated (486 μmol/L) creatinine concentration. Results. In the method comparison study, despite the fact that the correlation between both methods for determining serum creatinine is very good (r = 0.998, p 0.001), the regression analysis revealed that the results are not transferable, as indicated by the slope and intercept, which are significantly different from 1 and 0, respectively. A positive bias of + 14.1% in the determination of serum creatinine by uncompensated kinetic Jaffe method was found, and when the creatinine value is lower than ~ 180 μmol/L this difference or bis progressively increases. We found a significant positive interference due to proteins and glucose and a significant negative interference due to bilirubin by kinetic Jaffe method, and no interferences by enzymatic method were found. Conclusions. In conclusion, the enzymatic method is the best choice for determining serum creatinine with the ADVIA? 2400 analyzer.
机译:目的。这项研究的目的有两个方面:首先,比较通过酶法和无补偿动力学Jaffe方法测得的血清肌酐浓度;其次,比较某些干扰物质,例如葡萄糖,胆红素,蛋白质,甘油三酸酯和血红蛋白的影响。肌酐测量。方法。在ADVIA?上通过酶法和无补偿动力学Jaffe法测定血清肌酐浓度。 2400分析仪。通过向血清池中添加低(62μmol/ L),中(221μmol/ L)和升高(486μmol/ L)肌酐浓度的干扰溶液来测试干扰物质。结果。在方法比较研究中,尽管两种测定血清肌酐的方法之间的相关性都很好(r = 0.998,p <0.001),但回归分析显示结果不可转移,如斜率和截距所示。 ,分别与1和0显着不同。在未补偿的动力学Jaffe方法中测定血清肌酐时,正偏倚为+ 14.1%,当肌酐值低于〜180μmol/ L时,此差异或bis逐渐增大。我们通过动力学Jaffe方法发现了蛋白质和葡萄糖引起的显着正干扰,而胆红素引起的显着负干扰,而酶促方法未发现干扰。结论总之,酶法是用ADVIA测定血清肌酐的最佳选择。 2400分析仪。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号