2019, Number 4
<< Back Next >>
Rev Mex Patol Clin Med Lab 2019; 66 (4)
Quantitative determination of chlorine in sweat. Evaluation and comparison of two analytical methods
Salas C, Navea D, Lobos G
Language: Spanish
References: 14
Page: 181-186
PDF size: 275.88 Kb.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: In 99% of patients diagnosed with cystic fibrosis have an alteration in the concentration of chlorine in sweat (greater than 60 mEq/L), so the sweat test is the disease confirmation test. Hence the need that the laboratory has validated techniques reference methodology.
Objective: Analytical verification of the Sherwood Chloride Analyzer 926
® equipment for measuring chlorine in sweat, collected by the Gibson and Cooke technique.
Material and methods: Prospective study conducted between May and August 2015 441 sweat samples were analyzed in Labconco
® (reference) and Sherwood Chloride Analyzer 926
® (test) equipment. For the analysis of quantitative values, intraclass correlation coefficient and Lin concordance were used, for the qualitative Kappa index and area under the diagnostic performance curve was used.
Results: A degree of agreement was obtained for both measures with intraclass correlation coefficient values = 0.9936 and concordance correlation coefficient = 0.9672 for a 95% confidence interval.
Conclusions: The Sherwood Chloride Analyzer 926
® has an analytically similar behavior to the reference.
REFERENCES
Sánchez I, Pérez A, Boza L, Lezana V, Vila MA, Repetto G et al. Consenso nacional de fibrosis quística. Rev Chil Pediatr. 2001; 72 (4): 356-380.
Farrell P, White T, Ren C, Hempstead S, Accurso F, Derichs N et al. Diagnosis of cystic fibrosis: consensus guidelines from the cystic fibrosis foundation. J Pediatr. 2017; 181: S4-S15. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2016.09.064.
Massie J, Greaves R, Metz M, Wiley V, Graham P, Shepherd S et al. Australasian Guideline (2nd ed.): An annex to the CLSI and UK guidelines for the performance of the sweat test for the diagnosis of cystic fibrosis. Clin Biochem Rev. 2017; 38 (3): 115-130.
Gokdemir Y, Vatansever P, Karadag B, Seyrekel T, Baykan O, Bas Ikızoglu N et al. Performance evaluation of a new coulometric endpoint method in sweat testing and its comparison with classic Gibson & Cooke and chloridometer methods in cystic fibrosis. Front Pediatr. 2018; 6: 133. doi: 10.3389/fped.2018.00133.
Vermeulen F, Lebecque P, De Boeck K, Leal T. Biological variability of the sweat chloride in diagnostic sweat tests: a retrospective analysis. J Cyst Fibros. 2017; 16 (1): 30-35. doi: 10.1016/j.jcf.2016.11.008.
Gibson L, Cooke R. A test for concentration of electrolytes in sweat in cystic fibrosis of the pancreas utilizing pilocarpine by iontophoresis. Pediatrics. 1959; 23 (3): 545-549.
Mishra A, Greaves R, Massie J. The relevance of sweat testing for the diagnosis of cystic fibrosis in the genomic era. Clin Biochem Rev. 2005; 26 (4): 135-153.
Grupo Técnico, Programa de Fibrosis Quística, Unidad de Salud Respiratoria, Subsecretaría de Redes Asistenciales. Ministerio de Salud del Gobierno de Chile. Guía Técnica “Programa Nacional de Fibrosis Quística Orientaciones Técnicas Programáticas para Diagnóstico y Tratamiento” 2012.
LeGrys V, Applequist R, Briscoe D, Farrell P, Hickstein R, Lo S et al. Sweat testing: sample collection and quantitative chloride analysis; Approved Guideline. 3rd edition. CLSI document C34-A3: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2009.
Lin L. A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility. Biometrics. 1989; 45 (1): 255-268.
Cohen J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 1960; 20 (1): 37-46.
Shapiro S, Wilk M. An analysis of variance test for normality (complete samples). Biometrika. 1965; 52 (3-4): 591-611.
Cochran W. The distribution of the largest of a set of estimated variances as a fraction of their total. Annals of Human Genetics. 1941; 11 (1): 47-52.
Emiralioğlu N, Özçelik U, Yalçın E, Doğru D, Kiper N. Diagnosis of cystic fibrosis with chloride meter (Sherwood M926S chloride analyzer®) and sweat test analysis system (CFΔ collection system®) compared to the Gibson Cooke method. Turk J Pediatr. 2016; 58 (1): 27-33.