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 !

Comparison of within-laboratory precision, trueness and a total error of measurement procedures for CMIA and ECLIA methods in cyclosporine measurement (CROSBI ID 640942)

Prilog sa skupa u zborniku | sažetak izlaganja sa skupa | domaća recenzija

Njire Bratičević, Marina ; Perović, Antonija ; Ljubimir, Diana ; Comparison of within-laboratory precision, trueness and a total error of measurement procedures for CMIA and ECLIA methods in cyclosporine measurement // Biochemia Medica / Šimundić, Ana-Maria (ur.). Zagreb: Hrvatsko društvo za medicinsku biokemiju i laboratorijsku medicinu (HDMBLM), 2015. str. S55-S155

Podaci o odgovornosti

Njire Bratičević, Marina ; Perović, Antonija ; Ljubimir, Diana ;

engleski

Comparison of within-laboratory precision, trueness and a total error of measurement procedures for CMIA and ECLIA methods in cyclosporine measurement

Introduction: In the laboratory, verification of measurement procedures opens the possibility to compare different methods. The aim of this study was to compare within-laboratory precision (CVSl), trueness (BIAS) and total error (TE) for CMIA (Chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay) and ECLIA (Electrochemiluminescence immunoassay) method used for cyclosporine measurement. Materials and Methods: According to CLSI guideline protocol EP15-A2, verification of measurement procedures for cyclosporine measurement was conducted for CMIA method on Architect i2000SR (Abbott Laboratories, Illinois, USA) and for ECLIA method on Elecsys 2010 (Roche Diagnostics GmbH, Mannheim, Germany). For both measurement procedures calibration was performed on the first day. Cyclosporine concentration was measured in quality control materials in two concentration levels (L1 and L3) in triplicate for 5 days. Used control material for CMIA- Abbott method was MultiChem WBT (Technopath, Ireland) target values 92.3 ng/mL and 905 ng/mL and for ECLIA-Roche method PreciControl ISD (Roche Diagnostics GmbH, Germany) target values 91.5 ng/mL and 1170 ng/mL. Pretreatment of all used samples was performed using the same automatic pipette. Resulting values for precision were compared against the manufacturer’s criteria. Results: Precision of measurement procedures CMIA-Abbott and ECLIA- Roche method meet manufacturer’s set criteria. Obtained values for CMIA-Abbott vs. ECLIA-Roche method for within-laboratory precision (CVSl), trueness (BIAS) and total error (TE) were as following: CVSl (L1) 13.87% vs. 2.91% and CVSl (L3) 9.49% vs. 2.23%, BIAS (L1) -8.86% vs. 1.57% and BIAS (L3) -14.91% vs 1.37%, TE (L1) 36.04% vs. 7.27% and TE (L3) 33.51% vs. 5.74%. Conclusion: With the advantage of easier and faster sample pretreatment, measurement procedure for ECLIA- Roche method showed better accuracy, better trueness according to target values assigned to control materials and lower total error.

immunoassay ; quality control ; cyclosporine

nije evidentirano

nije evidentirano

nije evidentirano

nije evidentirano

nije evidentirano

nije evidentirano

Podaci o prilogu

S55-S155.

2015.

objavljeno

Podaci o matičnoj publikaciji

Biochemia Medica

Šimundić, Ana-Maria

Zagreb: Hrvatsko društvo za medicinsku biokemiju i laboratorijsku medicinu (HDMBLM)

1849-8205

Podaci o skupu

8.kongres Hrvatskog društva za medicinsku biokemiju i laboratorijsku medicinu s međunarodnim sudjelovanjem

poster

22.09.2015-26.09.2015

Rijeka, Hrvatska

Povezanost rada

nije evidentirano

Indeksiranost