scholarly journals Evaluation of analytical performance and comparison of clinical results of the new generation method AccuTnI+3 for the measurement of cardiac troponin I using both patients and quality control plasma samples

2015 ◽  
Vol 451 ◽  
pp. 129-134 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simona Storti ◽  
Silvia Masotti ◽  
Concetta Prontera ◽  
Maria Franzini ◽  
Paola Buzzi ◽  
...  
2018 ◽  
Vol 56 (3) ◽  
pp. 492-501 ◽  
Author(s):  
Silvia Masotti ◽  
Concetta Prontera ◽  
Veronica Musetti ◽  
Simona Storti ◽  
Rudina Ndreu ◽  
...  

AbstractBackground:The study aim was to evaluate and compare the analytical performance of the new chemiluminescent immunoassay for cardiac troponin I (cTnI), called Access hs-TnI using DxI platform, with those of Access AccuTnI+3 method, and high-sensitivity (hs) cTnI method for ARCHITECT platform.Methods:The limits of blank (LoB), detection (LoD) and quantitation (LoQ) at 10% and 20% CV were evaluated according to international standardized protocols. For the evaluation of analytical performance and comparison of cTnI results, both heparinized plasma samples, collected from healthy subjects and patients with cardiac diseases, and quality control samples distributed in external quality assessment programs were used.Results:LoB, LoD and LoQ at 20% and 10% CV values of the Access hs-cTnI method were 0.6, 1.3, 2.1 and 5.3 ng/L, respectively. Access hs-cTnI method showed analytical performance significantly better than that of Access AccuTnI+3 method and similar results to those of hs ARCHITECT cTnI method. Moreover, the cTnI concentrations measured with Access hs-cTnI method showed close linear regressions with both Access AccuTnI+3 and ARCHITECT hs-cTnI methods, although there were systematic differences between these methods. There was no difference between cTnI values measured by Access hs-cTnI in heparinized plasma and serum samples, whereas there was a significant difference between cTnI values, respectively measured in EDTA and heparin plasma samples.Conclusions:Access hs-cTnI has analytical sensitivity parameters significantly improved compared to Access AccuTnI+3 method and is similar to those of the high-sensitivity method using ARCHITECT platform.


Author(s):  
Silvia Masotti ◽  
Veronica Musetti ◽  
Concetta Prontera ◽  
Simona Storti ◽  
Claudio Passino ◽  
...  

Abstract Bakground The aim of this study was to evaluate both analytical characteristics and clinical results of a new chemiluminescent method for the measurement of cardiac troponin I (cTnI), named VITROS ® High Sensitivity Troponin I Assay, using the VITROS® 3600 automated platform. The results found with this new method were compared to those observed with hs-cTnI ARCHITECT and ECLIA hs-cTnT ELECSYS methods. Methods For evaluation of analytical performance and comparison of clinical results, plasma samples (lithium-heparin), were collected from apparently healthy subjects and patients with cardiovascular diseases. Results The hs-cTnI VITROS method showed values for limit of blank (LoB 0.33 ng/L), limit of detection (LoD, 0.91 ng/L), limit of quantifications at 20% (LoQ 20% CV, 1.82 ng/L), and 10% (LoQ 10% CV, 4,74 ng/L), which are comparable to those previously reported for other hs-cTnI methods. Moreover, the clinical results of the hs-cTnI VITROS method were found to be closely correlated to those of hs-cTnI ARCHITECT (R = 0,9883, N = 198) and ECLIA hs-cTnT Elecsys (R = 0,9704, N = 293) methods. Conclusions The hs-cTnI VITROS method shows analytical performance comparable to other cTnI and cTnT assay. The results of this study confirm that there are significant systematic differences among hs-cTnI methods. Further multicenter studies using larger reference populations are needed in order to obtain a better estimation, especially of the 99° percentile URL values categorized for sex and age of hs-cTnI and hs-cTnT methods.


2018 ◽  
Vol 56 (9) ◽  
pp. e229-e231 ◽  
Author(s):  
Veronica Musetti ◽  
Silvia Masotti ◽  
Concetta Prontera ◽  
Simona Storti ◽  
Rudina Ndreu ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 498 ◽  
pp. 27-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter A. Kavsak ◽  
Kelsey MacEachern ◽  
Eleonora Petryayeva ◽  
Lorna Clark

Author(s):  
Francesca Di Serio ◽  
Marco Caputo ◽  
Martina Zaninotto ◽  
Cosimo Ottomano ◽  
Mario Plebani

2010 ◽  
Vol 43 (12) ◽  
pp. 998-1002 ◽  
Author(s):  
M.M. Arrebola ◽  
J.A. Lillo ◽  
M.J. Diez De Los Ríos ◽  
M. Rodríguez ◽  
A. Dayaldasani ◽  
...  

2004 ◽  
Vol 345 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 123-127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fred S. Apple ◽  
MaryAnn M. Murakami ◽  
Robert H. Christenson ◽  
John L. Campbell ◽  
Cary J. Miller ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Giuseppe Lippi ◽  
Anna Ferrari ◽  
Giorgio Gandini ◽  
Matteo Gelati ◽  
Claudia Lo Cascio ◽  
...  

AbstractBackground:This study was aimed to evaluate the analytical performance of the novel chemiluminescent and fully-automated Beckman Coulter Access hsTnI high-sensitivity immunoassay for measurement of cardiac troponin I (cTnI).Methods:The study, using lithium heparin samples, included assessment of limit of blank (LOB), limit of detection (LOD), functional sensitivity, linearity, imprecision (within run, between-run and total), calculation of 99th percentile upper reference limit (URL) in 175 healthy blood donors (mean age, 36±12 years; 47% women) and comparison with two other commercial cTnI immunoassays.Results:The LOB, LOD and functional sensitivity of Access hsTnI were 0.14, 0.34 and 1.35 ng/L, respectively. The within-run, between-run and total imprecision was 2.2%–2.9%, 4.6%–5.4%, and 5.4%–6.1%, respectively. The linearity was excellent in the range of cTnI values between 0.95 and 4195 ng/L (r=1.00). The 99th percentile URL was 15.8 ng/L. Measurable cTnI values were found in 173/175 healthy subjects (98.9%). Good agreement of cTnI values was found with AccuTnI+3 (r=0.97; mean bias, −9.3%), whereas less satisfactory agreement was found with Siemens Dimension Vista cTnI (r=0.95; mean bias, −55%).Conclusions:The results of our evaluation of the Beckman Coulter Access hsTnI indicate that the analytical performance of this fully-automated immunoassay is excellent.


Author(s):  
Simona Storti ◽  
Concetta Prontera ◽  
Maria Serena Parri ◽  
Annalisa Iervasi ◽  
Simona Vittorini ◽  
...  

AbstractClin Chem Lab Med 2006;44:1022–9.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document