...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of clinical laboratory analysis. >Comparison between capillary zone electrophoresis and capillary isoelectric focusing for thalassemia screening in southern China
【24h】

Comparison between capillary zone electrophoresis and capillary isoelectric focusing for thalassemia screening in southern China

机译:毛细管区电泳与中国南部血症筛查毛细管电泳与毛细管等电泳的比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Background Capillary isoelectric focusing is a type of capillary electrophoresis method newly used for thalassemia screening in China. Although the good performance has been proved by several studies, whether it can best suit the special needs of Chinese patients still requires further investigations. Methods Comparisons were made between capillary zone electrophoresis method applied on Sebia Minicap and capillary isoelectric focusing method applied on Helena V8 platform E‐class on identifying Hb E, Hb CS , Hb H, and Hb Barts for patients from southern China. And mixing studies were used to evaluate the lowest detection limits of these 2 kinds of capillary electrophoresis system. Results Helena V8 could not make a distinction between peaks of Hb E and peaks of Hb A2 as Sebia Minicap did. All chosen patients with Hb H and/or Hb Barts could be screened out by both 2 systems, but when analyzed by Helena V8, it was hard to distinguish Hb H from Hb Barts sometimes, while Sebia Minicap could make a clear distinction between peaks of Hb H and Hb Barts. Only a part of patients (3 of 8, 37.5%) with Hb CS could be screened out by Helena V8, while all patients could be identified by Sebia Minicap. Sebia Minicap had a lower detection limit for trace peaks than Helena V8 (near to 0.2% vs near to 0.6%). Conclusions Compared with capillary zone electrophoresis, capillary isoelectric focusing applied on Helena V8 maybe is not the first choice for hemoglobinopathy testing in southern China.
机译:背景技术毛细管等电聚焦是一种新用于中国血症筛查的毛细管电泳方法。虽然几项研究证明了良好的表现,但是否能够最好地适应中国患者的特殊需求仍需要进一步调查。方法采用毛细管区电泳法在综合南方患者鉴定HB E,HB CS,HB H和HB Barts上施用的Sebia Minicap和毛细管等电聚焦方法对毛细管区电泳方法进行比较。混合研究用于评估这两种毛细管电泳系统的最低检测限。结果Helena V8无法区分HB E和Hb A2的峰值,因为Sebia Minicap确实如此。所有选择的HB H和/或HB BART患者都可以通过两个系统筛选出来,但是当由Helena V8分析时,有时难以区分HB H,而Sebia MinICAP可以明确区分峰值HB H和HB Barts。 Helena V8可以筛选出患有HB CS的患者(3,37.5%的3,37.5%),而可通过Sebia MinICAP鉴定所有患者。 Sebia Minicap的痕量峰值比Helena V8的检测限较低(接近0.2%靠近0.6%)。结论与毛细管区电泳相比,在Helena V8上应用的毛细管等电聚焦可能不是中国南方血吸虫病检测的首选。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

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