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: Ten electrophoretic methods compared with a selected method for quantifying lactate dehydrogenase isoenzymes in serum.
    Author: Moses GC, Ross ML, Henderson AR.
    Journal: Clin Chem; 1988 Sep; 34(9):1885-90. PubMed ID: 3416440.
    Abstract:
    Using the Selected Method of McKenzie and Henderson (Selected Methods Clin Chem 1983;10:59-67) as a reference method, we compared the performance of 10 commercially available methods for determination of lactate dehydrogenase (LD, EC 1.1.1.27) isoenzymes. Results were expressed as percentage of total LD activity, as determined with two different types of densitometers shown to have an average difference less than 1.4% for each isoenzyme. All methods gave generally comparable results, as judged by Bland-Altman plots and correlation analyses. However, in general, estimates by the commercial methods for LD-1, LD-2, and LD-3 were lower, and for LD-4 and LD-5 were higher than with the Selected Method. The overall CV was less than 20% for all methods and isoenzymes, except for LD-4 and LD-5 by the Beckman Paragon, Helena LD-VIS, Gel LDH, Gel PC, and Iso Dot, Gelman LDH Isozyme, and Sebia Hydragel assays, for which it was greater than 20%. Overall, accuracy was best with the Helena Iso Dot and LD-VIS assays, followed by the Corning LD Flur assay; accuracy was poorest with the Gelman LDH Isozyme, Sebia Hydragel, and Beckman Paragon assays.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]