FAME全自动酶免分析仪吐板后不同处理方式的结果探讨
|
摘要
目的对FAME全自动分析仪吐板后不同处理方式的结果进行探讨。方法按FAME吐板的不同阶段分为A、B两组实验,每组分别用3种不同的处理方法完成实验。方法1:在FAME中选择相应的程序,插入后续实验步骤,完成实验;方法2:洗板机洗板后放入FAME孵育塔,手工加试剂完成后续实验;方法3:洗板机洗板后放入有湿盒恒温水浴箱,手工加试剂完成后续实验;对照组为FAME正常自动完成实验。结果在检测结果均值、精密度方面,A、B两组方法1和2与对照组差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05),方法3均值较对照组偏低,精密度较差,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);最低检出浓度方面,方法1和2均较3检出浓度更低,灵敏度更高。结论 FAME全自动酶免系统吐板后,首选在FAME中进行后续实验,尽量避免人为因素影响,保证实验结果的准确、可靠。
Objective To discusse the results of different treatment methods after spitting plate of FAME automatic enzymefree analyzer. Methods According to the different stages of FAME spitting plate, it was divided into two groups A and B,and each group completed the experiment with 3 different treatment methods. Method 1: The experiment was completed by selecting the corresponding program in FAME and inserting the subsequent experimental steps. Method 2: After washing the plate by the plate washing machine, it was placed into FAME for incubation, and the reagent was added manually to complete the subsequent experiment. Method 3: After washing the plate, it was placed in a constant temperature water bath with a wet box, and the reagent was manually added to complete the subsequent experiment. The experiment in the control group was completed automatically and normally in FAME. Results In terms of the mean values and precision of the results, Method 1 and Method 2 used in the A and B groups had no significant difference from the control group(P>0.05). The mean value of Method 3 was significantly lower and the precision was worse than that of the control group. In term of the minimum detectable concentration,both Method 1 and Method 2 had lower detectable concentration and higher sensitivity than Method 3(P<0.05). Conclusion After FAME automatic enzyme-free system spiting plate, it is preferred to conduct the subsequent experiments in FAME to avoid the in?uence of human factors and ensure the accuracy and reliability of the experimental results.
Objective To discusse the results of different treatment methods after spitting plate of FAME automatic enzymefree analyzer. Methods According to the different stages of FAME spitting plate, it was divided into two groups A and B,and each group completed the experiment with 3 different treatment methods. Method 1: The experiment was completed by selecting the corresponding program in FAME and inserting the subsequent experimental steps. Method 2: After washing the plate by the plate washing machine, it was placed into FAME for incubation, and the reagent was added manually to complete the subsequent experiment. Method 3: After washing the plate, it was placed in a constant temperature water bath with a wet box, and the reagent was manually added to complete the subsequent experiment. The experiment in the control group was completed automatically and normally in FAME. Results In terms of the mean values and precision of the results, Method 1 and Method 2 used in the A and B groups had no significant difference from the control group(P>0.05). The mean value of Method 3 was significantly lower and the precision was worse than that of the control group. In term of the minimum detectable concentration,both Method 1 and Method 2 had lower detectable concentration and higher sensitivity than Method 3(P<0.05). Conclusion After FAME automatic enzyme-free system spiting plate, it is preferred to conduct the subsequent experiments in FAME to avoid the in?uence of human factors and ensure the accuracy and reliability of the experimental results.
引文
[1]王明芬,刘建,汪零.FAME全自动酶联免疫分析系统吐板原因分析[J].检验医学与临床,2012,9(23):3020-3021.
[2]范文成,范苏,张宁宁,等.FAME全自动酶免分析系统吐板现象分析[J].内蒙古中医药,2010,29(23):95-96.
[3]赵飞雪.Microlab FAME全自动酶免分析仪检测的影响因素及质量控制[J].检验医学与临床,2012,9(13):1677-1678.
[4]边礼.全自动酶免分析系统FAME吐板后再进行自动化处理的方法探讨[J].中国实用医药,2014,9(26):275-276.
[5]方翔,项国谦,寿明霞,等.全自动酶免分析仪在肝炎酶联免疫吸附试验中的应用评价[J].中华全科医学,2018,16(8):1338-1341.
[6]王宏.用仪器法和手工法对FAME已放弃实验所得结果的质控指标比较[J].中国实用医药,2014,9(6):253-254.
[7]郭咚.2012-2016年FAME全自动酶免分析系统故障分析及处理[J].中国卫生产业,2017,11(31):163-164.
[8]孟毓,岳献荣,秦小敏,等.FA M E 2 4/2 0全自动酶免分析仪常见故障原因、解决办法及维护[J].中国临床研究,2011,24(7):628-629.
[9]戴云,许雷,冯秋霞.全自动酶免分析仪FAME的保养及常见故障排除[J].医疗卫生装备,2012,33(3):140-142.
[10]吴洁,潘安杰.Microlab FAME全自动酶免分析仪常见故障分析处理及预防[J].临床输血与检验,2010,12(2):168-169.
[11]汪辛如.探讨振荡方式与进板时间对全自动酶免检测抗-HCV的影响[J].临床输血与检验,2014,16(2):207-209.
[12]陈宇.孵育时间对ELISA检测HBs Ag和抗-HCV结果的影响[J]医药前沿,2012,2(35):395-396.
[13]侯小玲,孙圣明.ELISA检测结果的影响因素及其排除方法[J]中国误诊学杂志,2007,7(16):3712-3713.
[14]朱晓明.浅析影响ELISA实验结果因素[J].中国畜禽种业2017,13(6):30.
[15]王胜虎,曹向红,李媛,等.全自动酶联免疫分析仪与手工酶联免疫法的检测结果比较[J].昆明医科大学学报,2016,37(10):96-99.
[16]徐国锋,徐飞,任碧琼,等.不同温育模式对全自动酶联免疫分析仪检测结果的影响[J].临床检验杂志,2015,33(9):657-658.
[2]范文成,范苏,张宁宁,等.FAME全自动酶免分析系统吐板现象分析[J].内蒙古中医药,2010,29(23):95-96.
[3]赵飞雪.Microlab FAME全自动酶免分析仪检测的影响因素及质量控制[J].检验医学与临床,2012,9(13):1677-1678.
[4]边礼.全自动酶免分析系统FAME吐板后再进行自动化处理的方法探讨[J].中国实用医药,2014,9(26):275-276.
[5]方翔,项国谦,寿明霞,等.全自动酶免分析仪在肝炎酶联免疫吸附试验中的应用评价[J].中华全科医学,2018,16(8):1338-1341.
[6]王宏.用仪器法和手工法对FAME已放弃实验所得结果的质控指标比较[J].中国实用医药,2014,9(6):253-254.
[7]郭咚.2012-2016年FAME全自动酶免分析系统故障分析及处理[J].中国卫生产业,2017,11(31):163-164.
[8]孟毓,岳献荣,秦小敏,等.FA M E 2 4/2 0全自动酶免分析仪常见故障原因、解决办法及维护[J].中国临床研究,2011,24(7):628-629.
[9]戴云,许雷,冯秋霞.全自动酶免分析仪FAME的保养及常见故障排除[J].医疗卫生装备,2012,33(3):140-142.
[10]吴洁,潘安杰.Microlab FAME全自动酶免分析仪常见故障分析处理及预防[J].临床输血与检验,2010,12(2):168-169.
[11]汪辛如.探讨振荡方式与进板时间对全自动酶免检测抗-HCV的影响[J].临床输血与检验,2014,16(2):207-209.
[12]陈宇.孵育时间对ELISA检测HBs Ag和抗-HCV结果的影响[J]医药前沿,2012,2(35):395-396.
[13]侯小玲,孙圣明.ELISA检测结果的影响因素及其排除方法[J]中国误诊学杂志,2007,7(16):3712-3713.
[14]朱晓明.浅析影响ELISA实验结果因素[J].中国畜禽种业2017,13(6):30.
[15]王胜虎,曹向红,李媛,等.全自动酶联免疫分析仪与手工酶联免疫法的检测结果比较[J].昆明医科大学学报,2016,37(10):96-99.
[16]徐国锋,徐飞,任碧琼,等.不同温育模式对全自动酶联免疫分析仪检测结果的影响[J].临床检验杂志,2015,33(9):657-658.