Noel Stierlin, Andreas Hemmerle, Karin Jung, Jörg Thumfart, Martin Risch, Lorenz Risch
{"title":"根据《体外诊断条例》(IVDR)比较测量相同分析物的两种不同技术","authors":"Noel Stierlin, Andreas Hemmerle, Karin Jung, Jörg Thumfart, Martin Risch, Lorenz Risch","doi":"10.1515/labmed-2024-0052","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives This study systematically compared the performance and comparability of two medical laboratory analytical instruments, the conventional wet chemistry analyzer (cobas) and the dry slide technology (Vitros), across various clinical chemistry assays. Methods The evaluation focused on assessing imprecision, inaccuracy, recovery, and method comparison using leftover patient serum samples. Results The results indicated good to very good agreement for most clinical chemistry analytes, with larger differences observed for comparison of serum patient samples on albumin and protein. Conclusions Understanding and acknowledging method-specific variations, are crucial for accurate result interpretation in clinical laboratories. This study contributes valuable insights to ongoing discussions on method standardization.","PeriodicalId":55986,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Laboratory Medicine","volume":"187 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of two different technologies measuring the same analytes in view of the In Vitro Diagnostica Regulation (IVDR)\",\"authors\":\"Noel Stierlin, Andreas Hemmerle, Karin Jung, Jörg Thumfart, Martin Risch, Lorenz Risch\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/labmed-2024-0052\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objectives This study systematically compared the performance and comparability of two medical laboratory analytical instruments, the conventional wet chemistry analyzer (cobas) and the dry slide technology (Vitros), across various clinical chemistry assays. Methods The evaluation focused on assessing imprecision, inaccuracy, recovery, and method comparison using leftover patient serum samples. Results The results indicated good to very good agreement for most clinical chemistry analytes, with larger differences observed for comparison of serum patient samples on albumin and protein. Conclusions Understanding and acknowledging method-specific variations, are crucial for accurate result interpretation in clinical laboratories. This study contributes valuable insights to ongoing discussions on method standardization.\",\"PeriodicalId\":55986,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Laboratory Medicine\",\"volume\":\"187 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Laboratory Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/labmed-2024-0052\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Laboratory Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/labmed-2024-0052","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparison of two different technologies measuring the same analytes in view of the In Vitro Diagnostica Regulation (IVDR)
Objectives This study systematically compared the performance and comparability of two medical laboratory analytical instruments, the conventional wet chemistry analyzer (cobas) and the dry slide technology (Vitros), across various clinical chemistry assays. Methods The evaluation focused on assessing imprecision, inaccuracy, recovery, and method comparison using leftover patient serum samples. Results The results indicated good to very good agreement for most clinical chemistry analytes, with larger differences observed for comparison of serum patient samples on albumin and protein. Conclusions Understanding and acknowledging method-specific variations, are crucial for accurate result interpretation in clinical laboratories. This study contributes valuable insights to ongoing discussions on method standardization.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Laboratory Medicine (JLM) is a bi-monthly published journal that reports on the latest developments in laboratory medicine. Particular focus is placed on the diagnostic aspects of the clinical laboratory, although technical, regulatory, and educational topics are equally covered. The Journal specializes in the publication of high-standard, competent and timely review articles on clinical, methodological and pathogenic aspects of modern laboratory diagnostics. These reviews are critically reviewed by expert reviewers and JLM’s Associate Editors who are specialists in the various subdisciplines of laboratory medicine. In addition, JLM publishes original research articles, case reports, point/counterpoint articles and letters to the editor, all of which are peer reviewed by at least two experts in the field.