We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparison of plasma aldosterone measured by chemiluminescence immunoassay and liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry in screening test for primary aldosteronism.
Practical Laboratory Medicine 2024 March
BACKGROUND: Whether chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA) and liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) for plasma aldosterone concentration (PAC) measurement can be used interchangeably in primary aldosteronism (PA) screening is still controversial. The purpose of this study was to compare CLIA to LC-MS/MS for PAC measurement in PA screening.
METHODS: All participants underwent aldosterone-to-renin ratio (ARR) testing. PA was diagnosed by captopril challenge test or saline infusion test. PAC in screening test was measured with CLIA and LC-MS/MS. Plasma direct renin concentration in screening and confirmatory test was measured with CLIA. The concordance between CLIA and LC-MS/MS for PAC measurement in PA screening was analyzed.
RESULTS: Twenty-one healthy volunteers, 61 patients with essential hypertension (EH) and 43 PA patients were enrolled. Median PAC by CLIA was 84.7 % higher than that by LC-MS/MS in screening test ( P < 0.001). A positive correlation of PAC was observed between the two assays (Pearson r coefficient 0.770, P < 0.001). When ARR was used in differentiating PA from EH, there was no difference in the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve between CLIA and LC-MS/MS for PAC measurement (0.968 vs 0.950, P = 0.249).
CONCLUSION: CLIA and LC-MS/MS for PAC measurement exhibited high and comparable efficacy in PA screening. CLIA is a reliable and feasible alternative in PA screening test.
METHODS: All participants underwent aldosterone-to-renin ratio (ARR) testing. PA was diagnosed by captopril challenge test or saline infusion test. PAC in screening test was measured with CLIA and LC-MS/MS. Plasma direct renin concentration in screening and confirmatory test was measured with CLIA. The concordance between CLIA and LC-MS/MS for PAC measurement in PA screening was analyzed.
RESULTS: Twenty-one healthy volunteers, 61 patients with essential hypertension (EH) and 43 PA patients were enrolled. Median PAC by CLIA was 84.7 % higher than that by LC-MS/MS in screening test ( P < 0.001). A positive correlation of PAC was observed between the two assays (Pearson r coefficient 0.770, P < 0.001). When ARR was used in differentiating PA from EH, there was no difference in the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve between CLIA and LC-MS/MS for PAC measurement (0.968 vs 0.950, P = 0.249).
CONCLUSION: CLIA and LC-MS/MS for PAC measurement exhibited high and comparable efficacy in PA screening. CLIA is a reliable and feasible alternative in PA screening test.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app