Cargando…

Comparison of four matrixes for diluting insulin in routine clinical measurements

OBJECTIVE: In our laboratory, 2.36% (6626/280765) samples obtained for insulin evaluation have serum insulin concentrations higher than 300 mU/L, resulting in curves outside the linear range in the insulin release test (IRT). Accordingly, using appropriate dilution protocols to determine insulin con...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Li, Honglei, Wang, Danchen, Guo, Xiuzhi, Xia, Liangyu, Wu, Qiong, Cheng, Xinqi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7521276/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32506749
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jcla.23396
_version_ 1783587944565571584
author Li, Honglei
Wang, Danchen
Guo, Xiuzhi
Xia, Liangyu
Wu, Qiong
Cheng, Xinqi
author_facet Li, Honglei
Wang, Danchen
Guo, Xiuzhi
Xia, Liangyu
Wu, Qiong
Cheng, Xinqi
author_sort Li, Honglei
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: In our laboratory, 2.36% (6626/280765) samples obtained for insulin evaluation have serum insulin concentrations higher than 300 mU/L, resulting in curves outside the linear range in the insulin release test (IRT). Accordingly, using appropriate dilution protocols to determine insulin concentration accurately is important. Here, we compared the effectiveness and economy of four different solutions for diluting high‐insulin serum in routine clinical measurements. METHOD: Residual serum samples with high‐insulin concentrations ranging from 200 to 300 mU/L were collected in Peking Union Medical College Hospital from August to November 2017. Four different matrixes including a Siemens original diluent, pure water, 0.9% NaCl, and low‐insulin serum (labeled as A to D, respectively) were used to dilute the serum in the ratios of 1:2, 1:5, and 1:10. RESULTS: We found that the linear correlation coefficients of A to D were higher than 0.9. The recovery rates of A to D were 86.4%–104.0%, 73.2%–99.3%, 76.4%–101.3%, and 84.2%–99.7%, respectively. We conclude that the use of 0.9% NaCl, pure water, or low‐insulin serum to dilute high‐serum insulin (>300 mU/L) is feasible and cost‐effective. CONCLUSION: We recommend a dilution factor of 1:5 on a Siemens ADVIA Centaur XP(®) instrument. The clinically reported range was 0.5‐1500 mU/L. For specific samples (>1500 mU/L), we recommended using low‐insulin serum samples for dilution.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7521276
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-75212762020-09-30 Comparison of four matrixes for diluting insulin in routine clinical measurements Li, Honglei Wang, Danchen Guo, Xiuzhi Xia, Liangyu Wu, Qiong Cheng, Xinqi J Clin Lab Anal Research Articles OBJECTIVE: In our laboratory, 2.36% (6626/280765) samples obtained for insulin evaluation have serum insulin concentrations higher than 300 mU/L, resulting in curves outside the linear range in the insulin release test (IRT). Accordingly, using appropriate dilution protocols to determine insulin concentration accurately is important. Here, we compared the effectiveness and economy of four different solutions for diluting high‐insulin serum in routine clinical measurements. METHOD: Residual serum samples with high‐insulin concentrations ranging from 200 to 300 mU/L were collected in Peking Union Medical College Hospital from August to November 2017. Four different matrixes including a Siemens original diluent, pure water, 0.9% NaCl, and low‐insulin serum (labeled as A to D, respectively) were used to dilute the serum in the ratios of 1:2, 1:5, and 1:10. RESULTS: We found that the linear correlation coefficients of A to D were higher than 0.9. The recovery rates of A to D were 86.4%–104.0%, 73.2%–99.3%, 76.4%–101.3%, and 84.2%–99.7%, respectively. We conclude that the use of 0.9% NaCl, pure water, or low‐insulin serum to dilute high‐serum insulin (>300 mU/L) is feasible and cost‐effective. CONCLUSION: We recommend a dilution factor of 1:5 on a Siemens ADVIA Centaur XP(®) instrument. The clinically reported range was 0.5‐1500 mU/L. For specific samples (>1500 mU/L), we recommended using low‐insulin serum samples for dilution. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020-06-07 /pmc/articles/PMC7521276/ /pubmed/32506749 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jcla.23396 Text en © 2020 The Authors. Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Articles
Li, Honglei
Wang, Danchen
Guo, Xiuzhi
Xia, Liangyu
Wu, Qiong
Cheng, Xinqi
Comparison of four matrixes for diluting insulin in routine clinical measurements
title Comparison of four matrixes for diluting insulin in routine clinical measurements
title_full Comparison of four matrixes for diluting insulin in routine clinical measurements
title_fullStr Comparison of four matrixes for diluting insulin in routine clinical measurements
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of four matrixes for diluting insulin in routine clinical measurements
title_short Comparison of four matrixes for diluting insulin in routine clinical measurements
title_sort comparison of four matrixes for diluting insulin in routine clinical measurements
topic Research Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7521276/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32506749
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jcla.23396
work_keys_str_mv AT lihonglei comparisonoffourmatrixesfordilutinginsulininroutineclinicalmeasurements
AT wangdanchen comparisonoffourmatrixesfordilutinginsulininroutineclinicalmeasurements
AT guoxiuzhi comparisonoffourmatrixesfordilutinginsulininroutineclinicalmeasurements
AT xialiangyu comparisonoffourmatrixesfordilutinginsulininroutineclinicalmeasurements
AT wuqiong comparisonoffourmatrixesfordilutinginsulininroutineclinicalmeasurements
AT chengxinqi comparisonoffourmatrixesfordilutinginsulininroutineclinicalmeasurements