PubMed · 10248175
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
E E Pullen. Computers help provide better care.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10248175/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
The Sonoclot Coagulation Analyzer is a viscoelastometer used for in vitro analysis of the coagulation process from the start of fibrin formation, through polymerization of the fibrin monomer, platelet interaction, and eventually to clot retraction and lysis. In this paper, we have analyzed series of Sonoclot curves and simultaneously obtained coagulation tests (APT, PT, Fibrinogen, Platelet Count, and D-dimer) from patients who underwent total hip replacements (THA). By using the Principal Component Analysis method (PCA), we found that the most important coagulation test variables as reflected in the Sonoclot signature, are Platelet Count, PT, and Fibrinogen. Also, by using a Back-Propagation Neural Network (BP), we were able to reconstruct the coagulation variables Platelet Count, PT, and Fibrinogen from the Sonoclot curve with a reasonable accuracy. This would also indicate that these three coagulation test variables are most important in determining the appearance of the Sonoclot signature.
BACKGROUND: Present methods for measuring serum total iron-binding capacity (TIBC) involve manipulation of samples or performance of two assays on each sample. We developed a direct automated assay (DTIBC) for TIBC. METHODS: We added to serum a saturating amount of iron bound to an excess of chelating dye at a low pH, recorded a blank reading that represented the sum of the saturating amount of iron plus the serum iron, and then added a strong neutral pH buffer. The decrease in absorbance (as transferrin extracts iron from the iron-dye complex) is directly proportional to the TIBC. TIBC values for 125 patients were determined by DTIBC, alumina column TIBC (AC), magnetic particle TIBC (MTIBC), and the UIBC method (UIBC) on Roche COBAS FARA and Mira chemistry analyzers. In a separate study, TIBC values for 128 patients were determined on an Olympus AU400 by the DTIBC and the MTIBC methods. RESULTS: Methods comparisons on the COBAS analyzers yielded the following results: DTIBC = 1.05(MTIBC) - 1.0 micromol/L (r = 0.987; S(y/x) = 2.6 micromol/L); DTIBC = 1.07(AC) - 1.0 micromol/L (r = 0.982; S(y/x) = 3.0 micromol/L); and DTIBC = 1.14(UIBC) + 3.4 micromol/L (r = 0.982; S(y/x) = 3.0 micromol/L). A similar correlation study using the Olympus AU400 yielded DTIBC = 1.00(MTIBC) - 0.1 micromol/L (r = 0.983; S(y/x) = 2.7 micromol/L). The assay was linear from 12.5 to 125 micromol/L (70-700 microg/dL) TIBC on the COBAS FARA. Within- and between-run imprecision (CV) was <or=4.8% at two concentrations. Plasma samples were unsuitable for the method. No interference was seen with common interferants other than ascorbate, deferoxamine, and ferrous sulfate, and only at concentrations well above normal. CONCLUSION: The new DTIBC assay is suitable for routine use in clinical laboratories and may improve the quality of iron metabolism studies.