PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Goce Dimeski

Publications and source records attributed to Goce Dimeski.

10 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Analytical performance of serum free light-chain assay during monitoring of patients with monoclonal light-chain diseases.

BACKGROUND: Measurement of serum free light chains (FLC) is useful for the diagnosis and monitoring of monoclonal light-chain diseases. It has been suggested that there will be widespread replacement of urine Bence Jones protein measurement by serum FLC assay. We report on our experience with the assay during monitoring of light-chain myeloma (LCMM) and AL amyloidosis (AL). METHODS: Serum FLC immunoassay, serum and/or urine protein electrophoresis and immunofixation were performed on serial samples during monitoring of LCMM. Recovery and immunoreactivity of FLC were tested by sample dilution. Assay precision was determined by repeat assay of samples over several reagent lots. RESULTS: In one of 23 patients with LCMM there was non-reaction of a monoclonal kappa FLC with some reagent lots and the assay did not indicate disease relapse. Samples showed non-linear, non-parallel immunoreactivity on dilution. Several tested monoclonal FLC gave lower values at the assay starting dilution compared with higher sample dilution and non-parallel dose-response curves. The median between-reagent lot variation for FLC measurement was 19-20% CV. CONCLUSIONS: Laboratory staff and clinicians need to be aware of the potential for non-reactivity of individual monoclonal FLC, and the effects of dilution and precision on FLC values and their interpretation.

Aged↗
PubMed2005

Correction and reporting of potassium results in haemolysed samples.

BACKGROUND: Potassium is usually the most important analyte affected by in vitro haemolysis and the result obtained may falsely indicate or disguise a life-threatening abnormality and so give rise to inappropriate treatment. The purpose of the study was to provide a solution to the problem of reporting potassium on haemolysed samples, taking into account both clinical needs and analytical concerns (inter-individual and inter-sample variability). METHODS: Using a new procedure that mimics the collection process in an actual clinical setting, haemolysed samples were prepared from 41 volunteers with a range of inter-individual factors - haemoglobin 80-173 g/L, red blood cells 2.42-6.77 x 10(12)/L, leucocytes 3.0-306 x 10(9) /L and platelets 31-710 x 10(9)/L - in order to develop a more accurate correction equation using a haemolytic index (HI) corresponding to g Hb/L in plasma. RESULTS: The mean (range) potassium increase was 0.0036 mmol/L (0.0029-0.0053 mmol/L) per unit HI. The following equation was developed to estimate potassium increase per HI, in order to compensate approximately for potassium leakage in haemolysed samples: Corrected K+ = Measured K+ -(HI x 0.004). CONCLUSION: The balanced solution is this: instead of reporting the post-haemolysis corrected potassium result a qualitative comment is given, indicating the likely range of the potassium concentration. If the potassium result is in a critically low or high range, it is communicated promptly to the requesting clinician.

Blood Specimen Collection↗
PubMed2004

Objective determination of appropriate reporting intervals.

BACKGROUND: The reporting interval is the incremental value chosen in reporting analyte concentration. Reporting intervals for different analytes are often inappropriately narrow, when analytical imprecision and biological variability are considered. METHODS: We have used statistical techniques to determine intervals for individual analytes at which there is 50% or 95% confidence that two results are analytically different, and compared these with the reporting intervals in use for a range of general chemistry analytes and analytes usually measured by immunoassay. RESULTS: No analytes met the criteria for 95% confidence that the results are analytically different. Even at the 50% confidence level, 24 of 46 analytes failed at all concentrations examined. For some analytes, particularly hormones at high concentration, the reporting interval increment should be increased by a factor of at least ten. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of analytes are inappropriately reported when analytical precision alone is considered. The concept of the 'uncertainty of measurement' has not been adequately addressed. A consensus should be reached and implemented on appropriate reporting intervals for all analytes.

Chemistry, Clinical↗