检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
出 处:《中华检验医学杂志》2008年第1期100-103,共4页Chinese Journal of Laboratory Medicine
基 金:深圳市卫生局重点科技项目(200609)
摘 要:目的探讨不同实验室以及同一实验室的不同血凝分析仪检测结果的一致性。方法将不同实验室的14台血凝分析仪分为3组,分别为STA系列(A组)、ACL系列(B组)、CA系列(C组),同时检测同一批号不同水平质控品(水平1、2、3)的凝血酶原时间(PT)、国际标准化比值(INR)、活化部分凝血活酶时间(APTT)、纤维蛋白原含量(FIB)及凝血酶时间(TT);并以同一实验室检测原理基本一致的2台血凝分析仪同时检测139份受检血浆的PT、INR、APTT、PT演算法测定FIB(PT-FIB)、Clauss法测定FIB(FIB—C)。结果3组血凝分析仪检测INR水平3的结果分别为5.35±0.20、4.35±1.00、4.46±0.30,差异无统计学意义(P〉0.05);检测TT水平3的结果分别为(17.1±0.3)s、(15.5±1.1)s、(14.8±1.8)s,差异无统计学意义(P〉0.05);其他各检测指标结果间差异有统计学意义(P〈0.05);两两比较的结果表明,B组和C组检测结果的符合率高达66.7%(10/15)。同一实验室的ACL Futura和CA510血凝分析仪检测胛的结果分别为(17.7±6.7)s、(20.1±10.9)s,检测INR的结果分别为1.75±1.07、1.64±0.91,检测PT-FIB的结果分别为(3.51±1.50)g/L、(3.68±1.93)g/L,检测FIB—C的结果分别为(2.61±1.31)g/L、(2.58±1.45)g/L,上述指标间差异均无统计学意义(P〉0.05);而检测APTT的结果分别为(49.9±21.5)s、(39.1±16.7)s,差异具有统计学意义(P〈0.05);同时,二者检测PT、INR、APTT、PT—FIB和FIB—C结果的相关性良好,r值分别为0.9843、0.9888、0.9870、0.9756、0.9940;偏倚分析结果显示,2台血凝分析仪检测PT、INR、PT—FIB和FIB—C结果的一致性较好。结论检测原理基本相同的不同血凝分析仪,其检测结果具有较好的一致性。不同血凝分析仪应Objective To investigate the harmonization of results of Prothrombin time (PT), International Normahzed Ratio( INR), activated partial thromboplastin time (AVIT), fibrinogen (FIB) and thrombin time(TT) with different coagulation analyzers in different or same clinical laboratory. Methods PT, INR, APTr, FIB and Tr for the same quality control material were detected with 14 different coagulation analyzers, which are distributed in 12 clinical laboratories and classified into A, B and C group. Meanwhile, PT, INR, APTT, FIB of 139 samples were detected with two different coagulation analyzers in the same laboratory. Results There was no significant difference for detection of level 3 of both INR and Tr among the three group analyzers(P 〉 0. 05 ), but there was significant difference for other tests ( P 〈 0. 05 ). The comparison between groups showed that there was high percentage (66.7%) of consistency for detection of INR, FIB-C and Tr between group B and C. The results of two different coagulation analyzers (ACL Futura and CA 510) in same laboratory showed that there was no significant difference (P 〉0. 05) for detection of PT, INR, PT-FIB and FIB-C between them, and there was good correlation for them in detecting PT, INR, APTT,PT-FIB and FIB-C (r 〉0. 975). Analysis of bias showed that the bias of PT, INR, PT-FIB and FIB- C between the two different coagulation analyzers was acceptable according to CLIA'88. Conclusion There are good agreement for the results between different coagulation analyzers based upon the similar principle in coagulation analysis.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.30