首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Frontiers in Pediatrics >Performance Evaluation of a New Coulometric Endpoint Method in Sweat Testing and Its Comparison With Classic GibsonCooke and Chloridometer Methods in Cystic Fibrosis
【2h】

Performance Evaluation of a New Coulometric Endpoint Method in Sweat Testing and Its Comparison With Classic GibsonCooke and Chloridometer Methods in Cystic Fibrosis

机译:一种库仑终点法在汗液测试中的性能评估并与经典吉布森和库克比色计法在囊性纤维化中的比较

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

>Background: The objective of the study was to assess the diagnostic efficacy of the coulometric endpoint method and compare it with classic Gibson&Cooke and chloridometer methods.>Methods: This study is a prospective clinical study comparing two conventional sweat testing methods with the coulometric endpoint method in previously diagnosed cystic fibrosis (CF) patients and a non-CF control group. All individuals underwent two simultaneous sweat collections. One sample of sweat, collected by the CFΔ collector coil system, was analyzed by two methods: the titrimetric Cl measurement (Sherwood® Chloridometer 926S, Sherwood Scientific Ltd., Cambridge, UK) and the coulometric endpoint method (CF Δ Collection System®, UTSAT/Turkey); the second sample was collected from the other forearm by the Gibson&Cooke method and the collected sweat was analyzed by manual titration in accordance with the Schales&Schales method. Within-run and between-run imprecisions were evaluated via Cl concentrations of 40, 70, and 130 mmol/L samples.>Results: One hundred and seventy (60 CF and 110 controls) subjects were included in the study.All three sweat test methods discriminated CF subjects from the healthy individuals. The mean difference between the coulometric endpoint and titrimetric Cl measurement methods was −1.5 mmol/L, (95% confidence limits of agreement, ranging from −8.9 to 15.9 mmol/L); the mean difference between manual titration vs. coulometric endpoint methods was 12.8 mmol/L, (95% confidence limits of agreement ranging from −9.7 to 45.3 mmol/L) and the mean difference between the manual titration and titrimetric Cl measurement methods was 11.3 mmol/L, (95% confidence limits of agreement ranging from −7.8 to 40.5 mmol/L) based on a Bland-Altman analysis. In the Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, made on the basis that Cl concentration values < 40 mmol/L exclude the CF diagnosis, the coulometric endpoint method resulted in 96.7% sensitivity and 100% specificity for a cut-off value of 58.5 mmol/L (AUC: 0.994; 95% CI = 0.986–1.000; p < 0.001).>Conclusions: The coulometric endpoint method can be as reliable as quantitative sweat Cl analysis and may be considered as a definitive diagnostic tool for CF.
机译:>背景:该研究的目的是评估库仑终点法的诊断功效,并将其与经典的Gibson&Cooke和比色计法进行比较。>方法:研究比较了先前诊断的囊性纤维化(CF)患者和非CF对照组的两种常规汗液测试方法与库仑终点法。所有个体同时进行两次汗液收集。通过两种方法分析了CFΔ收集器线圈系统收集的一份汗液样本:滴定Cl -滴定法测量(Sherwood®Chloridometer 926S,Sherwood Scientific Ltd.,英国剑桥)和电量分析法终点方法(CFΔ采集系统®,UTSAT /土耳其);第二个样本是通过Gibson&Cooke方法从另一个前臂收集的,收集的汗液根据Schales&Schales方法通过手动滴定进行了分析。通过40、70和130 mmol / L样品的Cl -浓度评估了批次内和批次间的不精确性。>结果:一百七十(60 CF和110名对照)受试者被纳入研究。所有三种出汗测试方法均将CF受试者与健康个体区分开。库仑法终点法和滴定法Cl -测量方法之间的平均差为-1.5 mmol / L(协议的95%置信度范围为-8.9至15.9 mmol / L);手动滴定与库仑终点法之间的平均差异为12.8 mmol / L(协议的95%置信度范围为-9.7至45.3 mmol / L),并且手动滴定与滴定Cl -<基于Bland-Altman分析,测量方法为11.3 mmol / L(协议的95%置信度范围为-7.8至40.5 mmol / L)。在接收器工作特性(ROC)分析中,基于Cl -浓度值<40 mmol / L排除了CF诊断,库仑终点法得出的灵敏度为96.7%,特异性为100%临界值为58.5 mmol / L(AUC:0.994; 95%CI = 0.986–1.000; p <0.001)。>结论:库仑终点法与定量汗液Cl < sup>-分析,可以被视为CF的权威诊断工具。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号