Clinical Chemistry
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Clinical Chemistry 46: 1631-1637, 2000;
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (12)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Zaninotto, M.
Right arrow Articles by Myocardial Damage, f. t. I. S. o. C. B. a. C. M. B.-I. S. o. L. M. W. G. o. M. o.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Zaninotto, M.
Right arrow Articles by Myocardial Damage, f. t. I. S. o. C. B. a. C. M. B.-I. S. o. L. M. W. G. o. M. o.
Related Collections
Right arrow Laboratory Management
Right arrow Proteomics and Protein Markers
(Clinical Chemistry. 2000;46:1631-1637.)
© 2000 American Association for Clinical Chemistry, Inc.

Articles

Multicenter Evaluation of Five Assays for Myoglobin Determination

Martina Zaninotto1, Franca Pagani2, Sara Altinier1, Paolo Amboni3, Roberto Bonora2, Alberto Dolci4, Patrizia Pergolini5, Arialdo Vernocchi3, Mario Plebani1, Mauro Panteghini2,a and for the Italian Society of Clinical Biochemistry and Clinical Molecular Biology–Italian Society of Laboratory Medicine Working Group on Markers of Myocardial Damage

1 Dipartimento di Medicina di Laboratorio, Università-Ospedale, 35100 Padova, Italy.

2 Laboratorio Analisi Chimico Cliniche 1, Azienda Ospedaliera ‘Spedali Civili’, 25125 Brescia, Italy.

3 Laboratorio Analisi Chimico Cliniche, Ospedali Riuniti, 24100 Bergamo, Italy.

4 Laboratorio Analisi Chimico Cliniche, Casa di Cura S. Maria, 21053 Castellanza VA, Italy.

5 Laboratorio Analisi Chimico Cliniche, Azienda Opedaliera ‘Maggiore della Carità’, 28100 Novara, Italy.
a Author for correspondence. Fax 39-030-3995369; e-mail panteghi{at}osp.unibs.it

Background: Lacking assay standardization, different myoglobin methods may produce results that differ significantly.

Methods: A multicenter study was carried out to compare the analytical performance of five commercially available assays for myoglobin measurement. Linearity, imprecision, interferences, and method comparison were studied according to NCCLS guidelines, whereas reference values were determined following IFCC recommendations.

Results: The BNA and Opus showed relatively high imprecision (all but one total CV >7.4%). Other assays showed lower CVs, but they varied among laboratories, particularly at a normal myoglobin concentration (Access, 6.0–11%; Hitachi, 3.8–5.8%; Stratus, 3.4–6.5%). Results were lower in anticoagulated samples on the Access, in heparin and citrate samples on the Stratus, and in citrate samples on the BNA and Opus, and increased in heparin and EDTA samples on the Hitachi. Use of separator gel produced results significantly lower (P <0.001) on the Hitachi and higher (P = 0.016) on the Opus. Bilirubin, turbidity, and hemoglobin had no effect on evaluated methods, but rheumatoid factor affected the Access. In method comparisons, high correlation coefficients (>=0.98) were obtained. The Stratus gave higher results; however, the Access and BNA gave the lowest. The following upper reference limits (µg/L) for men and women, respectively, were obtained: Access, 70 and 52; BNA, 51 and 49; Hitachi, 67 and 58; Opus, 80 and 50; and Stratus, 86 and 63.

Conclusion: The possibility of high imprecision and marked disagreement among commercial myoglobin assays should be carefully considered in clinical practice.




The following articles in journals at HighWire Press have cited this article:


Home page
 Clin. Chem.Home page
D. H. Wilson, G. Williams, R. Herrmann, D. Wiesner, and P. Brookhart
Issues in Immunoassay Standardization: The ARCHITECT Folate Model for Intermethod Harmonization
Clin. Chem., April 1, 2005; 51(4): 684 - 687.
[Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2000 by the American Association for Clinical Chemistry.