Nalazite se na CroRIS probnoj okolini. Ovdje evidentirani podaci neće biti pohranjeni u Informacijskom sustavu znanosti RH. Ako je ovo greška, CroRIS produkcijskoj okolini moguće je pristupi putem poveznice www.croris.hr
izvor podataka: crosbi !

Automated measurement of the erythrocyte sedimentation rate: method validation and comparison. (CROSBI ID 264714)

Prilog u časopisu | izvorni znanstveni rad | međunarodna recenzija

Lapić, Ivana ; Piva, Elisa ; Spolaore, Federica ; Tosato, Francesca ; Pelloso, Michela ; Plebani ; Mario Automated measurement of the erythrocyte sedimentation rate: method validation and comparison. // Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine, Aug 2019 (2019), 2019-0204, 10. doi: 10.1515/cclm-2019-0204

Podaci o odgovornosti

Lapić, Ivana ; Piva, Elisa ; Spolaore, Federica ; Tosato, Francesca ; Pelloso, Michela ; Plebani ; Mario

engleski

Automated measurement of the erythrocyte sedimentation rate: method validation and comparison.

Background Development of automated analyzers for erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) has imposed the need for extensive validation prior to their implementation in routine practice, to ensure comparability with the reference Westergren method. The aim of our study was to perform the analytical validation of two automated ESR analyzers, the Ves-Matic Cube 200 and the TEST1. Methods Validation was performed according to the recent International Council for Standardization in Hematology recommendations and included determination of intrarun and inter-run precision, assessment of sample carryover, hemolysis interference, sensitivity to fibrinogen, method comparison with the gold standard Westergren method and stability test. Results The highest intrarun imprecision was obtained for the low ESR range (33.5% for Ves-Matic Cube ; 37.3% for TEST1) while inter-run coefficients of variation on three levels were much better for the TEST1 (0%, 2% and 1.2%) compared to the Ves-Matic Cube 200 on two levels (24.9% and 5.8%). Both Ves-Matic Cube 200 and TEST1 showed no statistically significant difference when compared with Westergren. Bland-Altman analysis yielded overall insignificant mean biases for all comparisons, but a wider dispersion of results and 95% limits of agreement for comparisons including the Ves-Matic Cube 200. Carryover was considered insignificant, while hemolysis had a negative effect on all assessed ESR methods. The highest sensitivity to fibrinogen was observed for the Ves-Matic Cube 200, followed by Westergren and the least sensitive was the TEST1. Conclusions The obtained results proved the analytical validity of the TEST1 and the Ves-Matic Cube 200, and high comparability with the gold standard Westergren method, showing obvious improvements in standardization of ESR methods.

TEST1 ; Ves-Matic Cube 200 ; Westergren method ; erythrocyte sedimentation rate ; standardization ; validation

nije evidentirano

nije evidentirano

nije evidentirano

nije evidentirano

nije evidentirano

nije evidentirano

Podaci o izdanju

Aug 2019

2019.

2019-0204

10

objavljeno

1434-6621

1437-4331

10.1515/cclm-2019-0204

Povezanost rada

Povezane osobe



Kliničke medicinske znanosti, Interdisciplinarne biotehničke znanosti, Integrativna bioetika (prirodne, tehničke, biomedicina i zdravstvo, biotehničke, društvene, humanističke znanosti)

Poveznice
Indeksiranost