Analytical evaluation of the clinical chemistry analyzer Olympus AU2700 plus

  • Juricek J
  • Derek L
  • Unic A
  • et al.
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
12Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: The objective of this study was to perform the analytical evaluation of the clinical chemistry analyzer Olympus AU2700 plus. The evaluation was performed according to the guidelines of the European Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards (ECCLS). Materials and methods: The evaluation consisted of determination of within-run and between-run imprecision, inaccuracy and comparison with Olympus AU2700. The tested analytes were: glucose, creatinine, urate, total bilirubin, cholesterol, tryglicerides, calcium, phosphate, iron, unsaturated iron binding capacity, aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, lactate dehydrogenase, creatine kinase, alpha-amylase, alkaline phosphatase, potassium, sodium, chloride, C-reactive protein, antistreptolysin O and rheumatoid factor. Results: The results showed low within-run and between-run imprecision and acceptable inaccuracy for all analytes. High correlation with AU2700 analyzer was found. Intercept and slope (with 95% confidence interval) met the preferences of Passing-Bablok regression for all of the analytes except alanine aminotransferase, sodium, rheumatoid factor, creatine kinase, total bilirubin and tryglicerides. Conclusions: Olympus AU2700 plus analyzer shows acceptable precision and accuracy for majority of analytes, with the exception of sodium and chloride. Instrument is fully comparable with Olympus AU2700 analyzer for all but several analytes (ALT, RF, sodium, CK, total bilirubin and tryglicer ides), where only some minor deviations (constant and proportional difference) were observed.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Juricek, J., Derek, L., Unic, A., Serdar, T., Marijancevic, D., Zivkovic, M., & Romic, Z. (2010). Analytical evaluation of the clinical chemistry analyzer Olympus AU2700 plus. Biochemia Medica, 334–340. https://doi.org/10.11613/bm.2010.043

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free