Multicenter evaluation of five assays for myoglobin determination
| Autor: | Mauro Panteghini, Paolo Amboni, Mario Plebani, Martina Zaninotto, R. Bonora, Franca Pagani, Sara Altinier, Patrizia Pergolini, Arialdo Vernocchi, Alberto Dolci |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2000 |
| Předmět: |
medicine.medical_specialty
Chromatography Myoglobin business.industry Myoglobin measurement Biochemistry (medical) Clinical Biochemistry Sensitivity and Specificity Surgery Clinical Practice chemistry.chemical_compound Method comparison chemistry Multicenter study Reference Values Reference values medicine Humans Regression Analysis Assay standardization Reagent Kits Diagnostic Hemoglobin business |
| Zdroj: | Scopus-Elsevier |
| Popis: | Background: Lacking assay standardization, different myoglobin methods may produce results that differ significantly.Methods: A multicenter study was carried out to compare the analytical performance of five commercially available assays for myoglobin measurement. Linearity, imprecision, interferences, and method comparison were studied according to NCCLS guidelines, whereas reference values were determined following IFCC recommendations.Results: The BNA and Opus showed relatively high imprecision (all but one total CV >7.4%). Other assays showed lower CVs, but they varied among laboratories, particularly at a normal myoglobin concentration (Access, 6.0–11%; Hitachi, 3.8–5.8%; Stratus, 3.4–6.5%). Results were lower in anticoagulated samples on the Access, in heparin and citrate samples on the Stratus, and in citrate samples on the BNA and Opus, and increased in heparin and EDTA samples on the Hitachi. Use of separator gel produced results significantly lower (P Conclusion: The possibility of high imprecision and marked disagreement among commercial myoglobin assays should be carefully considered in clinical practice. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|