Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine · 2022
Detection of subarachnoid haemorrhage with spectrophotometry of cerebrospinal fluid - a comparison of two methods.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Clarin Marcus, Petersson Annika, Zetterberg Henrik, Ekblom Kim
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Spectrophotometric absorption curve analysis of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) for oxyhaemoglobin and bilirubin is necessary to accurately diagnose subarachnoid haemorrhage (SAH) in patients with typical symptoms but with negative findings on X-ray examinations. In this study, we evaluated the performance of two methods for interpreting absorption curves; one method from the United Kingdom National External Quality Assessment Service (UK-NEQAS) and the other from the national quality assurance programme in Sweden (Equalis).
METHODS: Consecutive absorbance curves (n=336) were interpreted with two different methods, and their performance was compared to the diagnosis as stated in the patient records.
RESULTS: The UK-NEQAS method displayed equal sensitivity to the Equalis method, but the specificity of the UK-NEQAS method was significantly higher than the Equalis method resulting in fewer false positive results. For UK-NEQAS, a positive predictive value (PPV) of 84.6% and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 99.7% were observed, whereas the Equalis method had a PPV of 27.5% and an NPV of 99.7%.
CONCLUSIONS: The semi-automated method based on the guidelines from UK-NEQAS provides an efficient and correct interpretation of absorbance curves with short turn-around times. We propose using this method for the routine interpretation of CSF spectrophotometric curves.
METHODS: Consecutive absorbance curves (n=336) were interpreted with two different methods, and their performance was compared to the diagnosis as stated in the patient records.
RESULTS: The UK-NEQAS method displayed equal sensitivity to the Equalis method, but the specificity of the UK-NEQAS method was significantly higher than the Equalis method resulting in fewer false positive results. For UK-NEQAS, a positive predictive value (PPV) of 84.6% and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 99.7% were observed, whereas the Equalis method had a PPV of 27.5% and an NPV of 99.7%.
CONCLUSIONS: The semi-automated method based on the guidelines from UK-NEQAS provides an efficient and correct interpretation of absorbance curves with short turn-around times. We propose using this method for the routine interpretation of CSF spectrophotometric curves.