Cargando…
LC-MS/MS Method for Serum Creatinine: Comparison with Enzymatic Method and Jaffe Method
Accurate quantification of creatinine (Cre) is important to estimate glomerular filtration rate (GFR). Differences among various methods of Cre quantification were previously noted. This study aims to develop a liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) method for serum Cre and compar...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4514740/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26207996 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0133912 |
_version_ | 1782382802035015680 |
---|---|
author | Ou, Meixian Song, Yunxiao Li, Shuijun Liu, Gangyi Jia, Jingying Zhang, Menqi Zhang, Haichen Yu, Chen |
author_facet | Ou, Meixian Song, Yunxiao Li, Shuijun Liu, Gangyi Jia, Jingying Zhang, Menqi Zhang, Haichen Yu, Chen |
author_sort | Ou, Meixian |
collection | PubMed |
description | Accurate quantification of creatinine (Cre) is important to estimate glomerular filtration rate (GFR). Differences among various methods of Cre quantification were previously noted. This study aims to develop a liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) method for serum Cre and compare this method with clinical routine methods. LC-MS/MS analysis was performed on API 4000 triple quadrupole mass spectrometer coupled with an Agilent 1200 liquid chromatography system. After adding isotope-labeled Cre-d3 as internal standard, serum samples were prepared via a one-step protein precipitation with methanol. The LC-MS/MS method was compared with frequently used enzymatic method and Jaffe method. This developed method, with a total run time of 3 min, had a lower limit of quantification of 4.4 μmol/L, a total imprecision of 1.15%–3.84%, and an average bias of 1.06%. No significant matrix effect, carryover, and interference were observed for the LC-MS/MS method. The reference intervals of serum Cre measured by LC-MS/MS assay were 41–79 μmol/L for adult women, and 46–101 μmol/L for adult men. Using LC-MS/MS as a reference, the enzymatic method showed an average bias of -2.1% and the Jaffe method showed a substantial average bias of 11.7%. Compared with the LC-MS/MS method, significant negative bias was observed for the enzymatic and Jaffe methods in hemolytic and lipimic samples. We developed a simple, specific, and accurate LC-MS/MS method to analyze serum Cre. Discordance existed among different methods. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4514740 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-45147402015-07-29 LC-MS/MS Method for Serum Creatinine: Comparison with Enzymatic Method and Jaffe Method Ou, Meixian Song, Yunxiao Li, Shuijun Liu, Gangyi Jia, Jingying Zhang, Menqi Zhang, Haichen Yu, Chen PLoS One Research Article Accurate quantification of creatinine (Cre) is important to estimate glomerular filtration rate (GFR). Differences among various methods of Cre quantification were previously noted. This study aims to develop a liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) method for serum Cre and compare this method with clinical routine methods. LC-MS/MS analysis was performed on API 4000 triple quadrupole mass spectrometer coupled with an Agilent 1200 liquid chromatography system. After adding isotope-labeled Cre-d3 as internal standard, serum samples were prepared via a one-step protein precipitation with methanol. The LC-MS/MS method was compared with frequently used enzymatic method and Jaffe method. This developed method, with a total run time of 3 min, had a lower limit of quantification of 4.4 μmol/L, a total imprecision of 1.15%–3.84%, and an average bias of 1.06%. No significant matrix effect, carryover, and interference were observed for the LC-MS/MS method. The reference intervals of serum Cre measured by LC-MS/MS assay were 41–79 μmol/L for adult women, and 46–101 μmol/L for adult men. Using LC-MS/MS as a reference, the enzymatic method showed an average bias of -2.1% and the Jaffe method showed a substantial average bias of 11.7%. Compared with the LC-MS/MS method, significant negative bias was observed for the enzymatic and Jaffe methods in hemolytic and lipimic samples. We developed a simple, specific, and accurate LC-MS/MS method to analyze serum Cre. Discordance existed among different methods. Public Library of Science 2015-07-24 /pmc/articles/PMC4514740/ /pubmed/26207996 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0133912 Text en © 2015 Ou et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Ou, Meixian Song, Yunxiao Li, Shuijun Liu, Gangyi Jia, Jingying Zhang, Menqi Zhang, Haichen Yu, Chen LC-MS/MS Method for Serum Creatinine: Comparison with Enzymatic Method and Jaffe Method |
title | LC-MS/MS Method for Serum Creatinine: Comparison with Enzymatic Method and Jaffe Method |
title_full | LC-MS/MS Method for Serum Creatinine: Comparison with Enzymatic Method and Jaffe Method |
title_fullStr | LC-MS/MS Method for Serum Creatinine: Comparison with Enzymatic Method and Jaffe Method |
title_full_unstemmed | LC-MS/MS Method for Serum Creatinine: Comparison with Enzymatic Method and Jaffe Method |
title_short | LC-MS/MS Method for Serum Creatinine: Comparison with Enzymatic Method and Jaffe Method |
title_sort | lc-ms/ms method for serum creatinine: comparison with enzymatic method and jaffe method |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4514740/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26207996 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0133912 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT oumeixian lcmsmsmethodforserumcreatininecomparisonwithenzymaticmethodandjaffemethod AT songyunxiao lcmsmsmethodforserumcreatininecomparisonwithenzymaticmethodandjaffemethod AT lishuijun lcmsmsmethodforserumcreatininecomparisonwithenzymaticmethodandjaffemethod AT liugangyi lcmsmsmethodforserumcreatininecomparisonwithenzymaticmethodandjaffemethod AT jiajingying lcmsmsmethodforserumcreatininecomparisonwithenzymaticmethodandjaffemethod AT zhangmenqi lcmsmsmethodforserumcreatininecomparisonwithenzymaticmethodandjaffemethod AT zhanghaichen lcmsmsmethodforserumcreatininecomparisonwithenzymaticmethodandjaffemethod AT yuchen lcmsmsmethodforserumcreatininecomparisonwithenzymaticmethodandjaffemethod |