Clinical biochemistry · 2023
Methods for analyzing positive cardiac troponin assay interference.
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.
Hammarsten Ola, Becker Charlotte, Engberg Anna E
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: The cardiac damage biomarkers cardiac troponin T (cTnT) and troponin I (cTnI) are used to identify patients with myocardial infarction (MI). To make the correct clinical decisions it is important to identify false positive results due to troponin assay interference. Often interferences are caused by high-molecular weight immunocomplexes called macrotroponin that may result in false troponin elevations because of delayed troponin clearance, or heterophilic antibodies that crosslink troponin assay antibodies and generate troponin-independent signals.
DESIGN & METHODS: We describe and compare four methods for cTnI assay interference analysis using a protein G spin column method, gel filtration chromatography and two versions of a sucrose gradient ultracentrifugation for cTnI assay interference analysis on five patients with confirmed cTnI interference and one MI patient without cTnI interference from our troponin interference referral center.
RESULTS: The protein G spin column method had a high between run variability but was still able to identify all five patients with cTnI interference. The sucrose gradient ultracentrifugation methods and the gel filtration method had simlar performancec and correctly identified the immunocomplexes that caused the cTnI interference.
CONCLUSIONS: Our experience is that these methods are sufficient to safely confirm or exclude positive cTnI assay interference.
DESIGN & METHODS: We describe and compare four methods for cTnI assay interference analysis using a protein G spin column method, gel filtration chromatography and two versions of a sucrose gradient ultracentrifugation for cTnI assay interference analysis on five patients with confirmed cTnI interference and one MI patient without cTnI interference from our troponin interference referral center.
RESULTS: The protein G spin column method had a high between run variability but was still able to identify all five patients with cTnI interference. The sucrose gradient ultracentrifugation methods and the gel filtration method had simlar performancec and correctly identified the immunocomplexes that caused the cTnI interference.
CONCLUSIONS: Our experience is that these methods are sufficient to safely confirm or exclude positive cTnI assay interference.