不同生化分析仪测定血清谷草转氨酶、尿素、血糖结果的比对分析
Comparison of the Results of AST, UREA and GLU between Different Automated Chemistry Analyzers

作者: 韩青 , 孙国华 , 孙芹敏 , 吕璘琳 , 马晓露 :大连医科大学附属第一医院检验科,辽宁 大连;

关键词: 全自动生化分析仪比对试验天门冬氨酸氨基转移酶尿素血糖Automated Chemistry Analyzers Comparison AST UREA GLU

摘要: 目的:通过对日立7600-110全自动生化仪和日立7170 s全自动生化分析仪测定结果比对,探讨不同仪器间天门冬氨酸氨基转移酶(AST)、尿素(UREA)和血糖(GLU)三个项目检测结果是否具有可比性。方法:按照美国临床实验室标准化委员会EP9-A文件要求,以日立7600-110作参考仪器,日立7170 s作为比对仪器,每天选取新鲜血清,分别在两台仪器上测定各项目,并记录结果。用SPSS 10.0软件对两台仪器的结果采用回归和相关分析,求其相关系数r及回归方程Y = bX + a,按照美国实验室修正法规(CLIA’88)规定的室间质量评价标准允许误差范围的1/2为判断依据,判断不同生化分析仪之间测定结果的可比性。结果:2台仪器检测AST、UREA、GLU结果差异无显著性(P > 0.05)。结论:2台仪器上AST、UREA、GLU的检测结果具有较好的可比性。

Abstract: Objective: To discuss the comparability of blood AST, UREA, GLU results and provide basis for result concordance in different automated chemistry analyzers. Methods: According to the profile NCCLS EP9-A, two different automated chemistry analyzers, HITACHI 7600-110(X), HITACHI 7170 s (Y) were used to examine different concentrations of fresh serum AST, UREA and GLU and to obtain the correlation coefficient and linear equation. The comparability of the different systems was evaluated according to the 1/2 of CLIA’88 standard. Results: The difference was not significant between the two different automated chemistry analyzers (P > 0.05). Conclusions: The results of AST, UREA and GLU are comparative in two kinds of detection systems according to clinic re-quirement.

文章引用: 韩青 , 孙国华 , 孙芹敏 , 吕璘琳 , 马晓露 (2016) 不同生化分析仪测定血清谷草转氨酶、尿素、血糖结果的比对分析。 医学诊断, 6, 21-24. doi: 10.12677/MD.2016.61005

参考文献

[1] National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards (1986) Method Comparison and Bias Estimation Using Patient Samples, Approved Guideline. EP9-2A, Pennsylvania. NCCLS.

[2] International Organization for Standardization (1999) Geneml Requirements for the Competence of Testing and Calibration Laboratories. ISO/IEC17025, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva.

[3] 魏昊, 丛玉隆. 医学实验室质量管理与认可指南[M]. 北京: 中国计量出版社, 2004: 72-75.

[4] 张秀明, 庄俊华, 徐宁, 等. 不同检测系统血清酶测定结果的偏倚评估与可比性研究[J]. 中华检验医学杂志, 2006(29): 561.

[5] 张传宝, 张克坚. 方法对比及偏差评估的方法——介绍NCCLS文件EP9-2A[J]. 江西医学检验, 2000, 18(2): 108- 109.

分享
Top