{"title":"止血蛋白的特异性测定:纤维蛋白原。","authors":"G Palareti, M Maccaferri","doi":"10.1007/BF02877563","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Fibrinogen levels are considered a useful indicator in several pathological conditions and recent epidemiological studies have indicated a relationship between fibrinogen levels and increased risk of cardiovascular disease. An accurate measurement of this protein is therefore recommended and the Italian Committee for Standardization of Methods in Hematology and Laboratory has carried out a collaborative study to determine accuracy, precision and comparability of results obtained by six different methods, i.e., 1. Blombäck and Blombäck method, 2. clotting assay according to von Clauss, 3. radial immunodiffusion according to Mancini et al., 4. total amount of clottable fibrinogen by means of turbidimetric assay according to Ellis and Stransky, and 5. with ChromotimeSystem, 6. prothrombin time (PT)-derived fibrinogen assay on ACL coagulometer. The most accurate resulted the von Clauss method, but only if calibrated with an internal standard; in fact, when the manufacturer's tables are used, the method proved to be highly inaccurate. The best precision, both intra- and between-laboratory, was obtained by the PT-derived test on ACL. On the basis of this still incomplete evaluation of the CISMEL study data, we can conclude that: i. some methods used in clinical laboratories give accurate results only after adequate calibration; ii. a reference standard pool may be a valid tool for calibration and for a better between-laboratory comparability; iii. a predilution of the samples with high fibrinogen levels seems indicated; iv. automation markedly increases the precision of methods.</p>","PeriodicalId":76092,"journal":{"name":"La Ricerca in clinica e in laboratorio","volume":"20 2","pages":"167-76"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1990-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/BF02877563","citationCount":"9","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Specific assays of hemostasis proteins: fibrinogen.\",\"authors\":\"G Palareti, M Maccaferri\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/BF02877563\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Fibrinogen levels are considered a useful indicator in several pathological conditions and recent epidemiological studies have indicated a relationship between fibrinogen levels and increased risk of cardiovascular disease. An accurate measurement of this protein is therefore recommended and the Italian Committee for Standardization of Methods in Hematology and Laboratory has carried out a collaborative study to determine accuracy, precision and comparability of results obtained by six different methods, i.e., 1. Blombäck and Blombäck method, 2. clotting assay according to von Clauss, 3. radial immunodiffusion according to Mancini et al., 4. total amount of clottable fibrinogen by means of turbidimetric assay according to Ellis and Stransky, and 5. with ChromotimeSystem, 6. prothrombin time (PT)-derived fibrinogen assay on ACL coagulometer. The most accurate resulted the von Clauss method, but only if calibrated with an internal standard; in fact, when the manufacturer's tables are used, the method proved to be highly inaccurate. The best precision, both intra- and between-laboratory, was obtained by the PT-derived test on ACL. On the basis of this still incomplete evaluation of the CISMEL study data, we can conclude that: i. some methods used in clinical laboratories give accurate results only after adequate calibration; ii. a reference standard pool may be a valid tool for calibration and for a better between-laboratory comparability; iii. a predilution of the samples with high fibrinogen levels seems indicated; iv. automation markedly increases the precision of methods.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":76092,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"La Ricerca in clinica e in laboratorio\",\"volume\":\"20 2\",\"pages\":\"167-76\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1990-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/BF02877563\",\"citationCount\":\"9\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"La Ricerca in clinica e in laboratorio\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02877563\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"La Ricerca in clinica e in laboratorio","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02877563","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9
摘要
纤维蛋白原水平被认为是几种病理状况的有用指标,最近的流行病学研究表明,纤维蛋白原水平与心血管疾病风险增加之间存在关系。因此,建议对这种蛋白质进行准确测量,意大利血液学和实验室方法标准化委员会开展了一项合作研究,以确定通过六种不同方法获得的结果的准确性、精密度和可比性,即1。Blombäck和Blombäck方法;根据von Clauss, 3进行凝血试验。径向免疫扩散根据Mancini et al., 4。根据Ellis和Stransky的浊度法测定可溶纤维蛋白原的总量;与ChromotimeSystem, 6。ACL凝血计凝血酶原时间(PT)纤维蛋白原测定。最准确的结果是冯·克劳斯法,但只有在用内标校准的情况下;事实上,当使用制造商的表格时,这种方法被证明是非常不准确的。在实验室内和实验室间,通过pt衍生的ACL测试获得了最好的精度。基于对CISMEL研究数据尚不完整的评估,我们可以得出以下结论:i.临床实验室使用的一些方法只有在充分校准后才能给出准确的结果;2参考标准池可能是一种有效的校准工具,可以更好地在实验室之间进行比较;3对高纤维蛋白原水平的样品进行预稀释似乎是必要的;自动化显著提高了方法的精度。
Specific assays of hemostasis proteins: fibrinogen.
Fibrinogen levels are considered a useful indicator in several pathological conditions and recent epidemiological studies have indicated a relationship between fibrinogen levels and increased risk of cardiovascular disease. An accurate measurement of this protein is therefore recommended and the Italian Committee for Standardization of Methods in Hematology and Laboratory has carried out a collaborative study to determine accuracy, precision and comparability of results obtained by six different methods, i.e., 1. Blombäck and Blombäck method, 2. clotting assay according to von Clauss, 3. radial immunodiffusion according to Mancini et al., 4. total amount of clottable fibrinogen by means of turbidimetric assay according to Ellis and Stransky, and 5. with ChromotimeSystem, 6. prothrombin time (PT)-derived fibrinogen assay on ACL coagulometer. The most accurate resulted the von Clauss method, but only if calibrated with an internal standard; in fact, when the manufacturer's tables are used, the method proved to be highly inaccurate. The best precision, both intra- and between-laboratory, was obtained by the PT-derived test on ACL. On the basis of this still incomplete evaluation of the CISMEL study data, we can conclude that: i. some methods used in clinical laboratories give accurate results only after adequate calibration; ii. a reference standard pool may be a valid tool for calibration and for a better between-laboratory comparability; iii. a predilution of the samples with high fibrinogen levels seems indicated; iv. automation markedly increases the precision of methods.