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: [Comparison of plasma total homocysteine determinations in 9 French hospital laboratories by using 6 different methods]. Author: Ducros V, Candito M, Caussé E, Couderc R, Demuth K, Diop ME, Drai J, Gerhardt MF, Quillard M, Read MH, Sauvant MP. Journal: Ann Biol Clin (Paris); 2002; 60(4):421-8. PubMed ID: 12147446. Abstract: A lot of methods are now available for total plasma homocysteine (tHcy) determination. Commercial kits using immunoassay, easier to use, begin to supplant in-house laboratory methods. Our aim is to evaluate the interchangeability of tHcy measurements in 9 French hospital laboratories. Six different method types were used: 2 gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS), 2 HPLC with fluorescence detection subdivided in one in-house method and one commercial kit (Bio-Rad ), 3 fluorescence polarization immunoassays (FPIA), 1 enzyme immunoassay, 1 amino acid analyser, 1 capillary electrophoresis coupled with laser-induced fluorescence detection (EC-LIF). Each laboratory analysed 41 patient's plasma samples in which 8 samples contained added homocystine. Results were analysed for imprecision, recovery, and methodological differences. The mean among-laboratory imprecision (CV) ranged from 12.5 to 18% in function of plasma sample type and was identical to the mean among-method variation. In terms of recovery, we obtained underestimated results with immunoassays. The bias relative to the GC-MS method was less than 12.5% except for two laboratories, one using FPIA assay and the other EC-LIF. In conclusion, the interchangeability of tHcy results between laboratories is not satisfactory and does not allow us to evaluate cardiovascular risk linked to moderate increases of tHcy.[Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]