化学发光免疫分析法和液相色谱-串联质谱法在原发性醛固酮增多症筛查试验中测量血浆醛固酮的比较

IF 1.7 Q3 MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY Practical Laboratory Medicine Pub Date : 2024-01-19 DOI:10.1016/j.plabm.2024.e00361
Wenzhan Chen , Fenghua Lai , Xiaoyu Huang, Shuang Yu, Nan Chen, Changliu Xu, Chenxue Wang, Shuhui Liang, Yanbing Li, Haipeng Xiao, Xiaopei Cao
{"title":"化学发光免疫分析法和液相色谱-串联质谱法在原发性醛固酮增多症筛查试验中测量血浆醛固酮的比较","authors":"Wenzhan Chen ,&nbsp;Fenghua Lai ,&nbsp;Xiaoyu Huang,&nbsp;Shuang Yu,&nbsp;Nan Chen,&nbsp;Changliu Xu,&nbsp;Chenxue Wang,&nbsp;Shuhui Liang,&nbsp;Yanbing Li,&nbsp;Haipeng Xiao,&nbsp;Xiaopei Cao","doi":"10.1016/j.plabm.2024.e00361","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Whether chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA) and liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) for plasma aldosterone concentration (PAC) measurement can be used interchangeably in primary aldosteronism (PA) screening is still controversial. The purpose of this study was to compare CLIA to LC-MS/MS for PAC measurement in PA screening.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>All participants underwent aldosterone-to-renin ratio (ARR) testing. PA was diagnosed by captopril challenge test or saline infusion test. PAC in screening test was measured with CLIA and LC-MS/MS. Plasma direct renin concentration in screening and confirmatory test was measured with CLIA. The concordance between CLIA and LC-MS/MS for PAC measurement in PA screening was analyzed.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Twenty-one healthy volunteers, 61 patients with essential hypertension (EH) and 43 PA patients were enrolled. Median PAC by CLIA was 84.7 % higher than that by LC-MS/MS in screening test (<em>P</em> &lt; 0.001). A positive correlation of PAC was observed between the two assays (Pearson <em>r</em> coefficient 0.770, <em>P</em> &lt; 0.001). When ARR was used in differentiating PA from EH, there was no difference in the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve between CLIA and LC-MS/MS for PAC measurement (0.968 <em>vs</em> 0.950, <em>P</em> = 0.249).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>CLIA and LC-MS/MS for PAC measurement exhibited high and comparable efficacy in PA screening. CLIA is a reliable and feasible alternative in PA screening test.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":20421,"journal":{"name":"Practical Laboratory Medicine","volume":"39 ","pages":"Article e00361"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352551724000076/pdfft?md5=8e7b6dc11f5e503e0cace75b3ec0907e&pid=1-s2.0-S2352551724000076-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of plasma aldosterone measured by chemiluminescence immunoassay and liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry in screening test for primary aldosteronism\",\"authors\":\"Wenzhan Chen ,&nbsp;Fenghua Lai ,&nbsp;Xiaoyu Huang,&nbsp;Shuang Yu,&nbsp;Nan Chen,&nbsp;Changliu Xu,&nbsp;Chenxue Wang,&nbsp;Shuhui Liang,&nbsp;Yanbing Li,&nbsp;Haipeng Xiao,&nbsp;Xiaopei Cao\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.plabm.2024.e00361\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Whether chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA) and liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) for plasma aldosterone concentration (PAC) measurement can be used interchangeably in primary aldosteronism (PA) screening is still controversial. The purpose of this study was to compare CLIA to LC-MS/MS for PAC measurement in PA screening.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>All participants underwent aldosterone-to-renin ratio (ARR) testing. PA was diagnosed by captopril challenge test or saline infusion test. PAC in screening test was measured with CLIA and LC-MS/MS. Plasma direct renin concentration in screening and confirmatory test was measured with CLIA. The concordance between CLIA and LC-MS/MS for PAC measurement in PA screening was analyzed.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Twenty-one healthy volunteers, 61 patients with essential hypertension (EH) and 43 PA patients were enrolled. Median PAC by CLIA was 84.7 % higher than that by LC-MS/MS in screening test (<em>P</em> &lt; 0.001). A positive correlation of PAC was observed between the two assays (Pearson <em>r</em> coefficient 0.770, <em>P</em> &lt; 0.001). When ARR was used in differentiating PA from EH, there was no difference in the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve between CLIA and LC-MS/MS for PAC measurement (0.968 <em>vs</em> 0.950, <em>P</em> = 0.249).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>CLIA and LC-MS/MS for PAC measurement exhibited high and comparable efficacy in PA screening. CLIA is a reliable and feasible alternative in PA screening test.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20421,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Practical Laboratory Medicine\",\"volume\":\"39 \",\"pages\":\"Article e00361\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352551724000076/pdfft?md5=8e7b6dc11f5e503e0cace75b3ec0907e&pid=1-s2.0-S2352551724000076-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Practical Laboratory Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352551724000076\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Practical Laboratory Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352551724000076","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景在原发性醛固酮增多症(PA)筛查中,化学发光免疫测定(CLIA)和液相色谱-串联质谱法(LC-MS/MS)测量血浆醛固酮浓度(PAC)是否可以互换使用仍存在争议。本研究的目的是比较 CLIA 和 LC-MS/MS 在 PA 筛查中的 PAC 测量方法。通过卡托普利挑战试验或生理盐水输注试验诊断 PA。筛查试验中的 PAC 采用 CLIA 和 LC-MS/MS 测量。筛查和确诊试验中的血浆直接肾素浓度是通过 CLIA 测定的。结果 21 名健康志愿者、61 名本质性高血压(EH)患者和 43 名 PA 患者参加了筛查。在筛查测试中,CLIA 法测定的 PAC 中位数比 LC-MS/MS 法测定的 PAC 中位数高 84.7 %(P < 0.001)。两种检测方法的 PAC 值呈正相关(Pearson r 系数为 0.770,P < 0.001)。当使用 ARR 区分 PA 和 EH 时,CLIA 和 LC-MS/MS 测量 PAC 的接收器操作特征曲线下面积没有差异(0.968 vs 0.950,P = 0.249)。CLIA是PA筛查测试中可靠可行的替代方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparison of plasma aldosterone measured by chemiluminescence immunoassay and liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry in screening test for primary aldosteronism

Background

Whether chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA) and liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) for plasma aldosterone concentration (PAC) measurement can be used interchangeably in primary aldosteronism (PA) screening is still controversial. The purpose of this study was to compare CLIA to LC-MS/MS for PAC measurement in PA screening.

Methods

All participants underwent aldosterone-to-renin ratio (ARR) testing. PA was diagnosed by captopril challenge test or saline infusion test. PAC in screening test was measured with CLIA and LC-MS/MS. Plasma direct renin concentration in screening and confirmatory test was measured with CLIA. The concordance between CLIA and LC-MS/MS for PAC measurement in PA screening was analyzed.

Results

Twenty-one healthy volunteers, 61 patients with essential hypertension (EH) and 43 PA patients were enrolled. Median PAC by CLIA was 84.7 % higher than that by LC-MS/MS in screening test (P < 0.001). A positive correlation of PAC was observed between the two assays (Pearson r coefficient 0.770, P < 0.001). When ARR was used in differentiating PA from EH, there was no difference in the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve between CLIA and LC-MS/MS for PAC measurement (0.968 vs 0.950, P = 0.249).

Conclusion

CLIA and LC-MS/MS for PAC measurement exhibited high and comparable efficacy in PA screening. CLIA is a reliable and feasible alternative in PA screening test.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Practical Laboratory Medicine
Practical Laboratory Medicine Health Professions-Radiological and Ultrasound Technology
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
40
审稿时长
7 weeks
期刊介绍: Practical Laboratory Medicine is a high-quality, peer-reviewed, international open-access journal publishing original research, new methods and critical evaluations, case reports and short papers in the fields of clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine. The objective of the journal is to provide practical information of immediate relevance to workers in clinical laboratories. The primary scope of the journal covers clinical chemistry, hematology, molecular biology and genetics relevant to laboratory medicine, microbiology, immunology, therapeutic drug monitoring and toxicology, laboratory management and informatics. We welcome papers which describe critical evaluations of biomarkers and their role in the diagnosis and treatment of clinically significant disease, validation of commercial and in-house IVD methods, method comparisons, interference reports, the development of new reagents and reference materials, reference range studies and regulatory compliance reports. Manuscripts describing the development of new methods applicable to laboratory medicine (including point-of-care testing) are particularly encouraged, even if preliminary or small scale.
期刊最新文献
Development of a rapid LFA test based on direct RT-LAMP for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 The measurement of immunosuppressive drugs by mass spectrometry and immunoassay in a South African transplant setting Falsely abnormal serum protein electrophoresis after administration of intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG): A retrospective cohort study Glycated albumin in pregnancy correlates negatively with body mass index and contributes to the risk of gestational diabetes mellitus A novel case of Hb Bart's hydrops fetalis following prenatal diagnosis: Case report from Huizhou, China
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1