These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Analyte comparisons between 2 clinical chemistry analyzers.
    Author: Sutton A, Dawson H, Hoff B, Grift E, Shoukri M.
    Journal: Can Vet J; 1999 Apr; 40(4):255-60. PubMed ID: 10200882.
    Abstract:
    The purpose of this study was to assess agreement between a wet reagent and a dry reagent analyzer. Thirteen analytes (albumin, globulin, alkaline phosphatase, alanine aminotransferase, amylase, urea nitrogen, calcium, cholesterol, creatinine, glucose, potassium, total bilirubin, and total protein) for both canine and feline serum were evaluated. Concordance correlations, linear regression, and plots of difference against mean were used to analyze the data. Concordance correlations were excellent for 8 of 13 analytes (r > or = 0.90); the correlations for albumin, potassium, and calcium were clinically unreliable. The linear regression analysis revealed that several analytes had slopes significantly different from unity, which was likely related to methodological differences. Compared to the wet reagent analyzer, the dry reagent analyzer showed excellent agreement for alkaline phosphatase, alanine aminotransferase, amylase (feline), urea nitrogen, cholesterol, creatinine, glucose, total bilirubin (canine), and total protein. However, it showed only slight to substantial agreement for amylase (canine), calcium, albumin, potassium, and total bilirubin (feline).
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]