Plasma midregional proadrenomedullin (MR-proADM) concentrations and their biological determinants in a reference population

Background: Midregional proadrenomedullin (MR-proADM) is emerging as a prognostic biomarker for detecting the failure of multiple organs. Establishment of scientifically robust reference intervals facilitates interpretation of laboratory test results. The objectives of this study were (i) to establish reliable reference intervals for plasma MR-proADM using a commercially available automated fluoroimmunoassay in apparently healthy individuals, and (ii) to identify biological determinants of MR-proADM concentrations. Methods: A total of 506 questionnaire-identified apparently healthy adults were enrolled in a single-center, cross-sectional study. A final reference group (n = 172) was selected after exclusion of obese individuals, those with increased values of laboratory biomarkers indicating asymptomatic myocardial injury or dysfunction, ongoing inflammation, diabetes, dyslipidemia and renal dysfunction and outliers. Results: The 2.5th and 97.5th percentile intervals for MR-proADM values in the reference group (90% confidence interval) were 0.21 (0.19-0.23) and 0.57 (0.55-0.59) nmol/L, respectively. Although older age, higher values of HbA(1c), C-reactive protein, B-type natriuretic peptide and body mass index, together with a history of smoking and a decreased estimated glomerular filtration rate were significantly associated with increasing concentrations of MR-proADM in both univariate and multivariate analyses, magnitudes of these relationships were modest and did not substantially influence MR-proADM reference intervals. Sex-dependent difference in MR-proADM reference intervals was not detected [0.19 (0.16-0.22)-0.56 (0.54-0.60) nmol/L in females vs. 0.22 (0.20-0.25)-0.58 (0.57-0.63) nmol/L in males]. Conclusions: Our study successfully established robust reference intervals for MR-proADM concentrations in plasma. Considering the negligible influence of potential biological determinants on plasma MR-proADM, we recommend the adoption of single reference intervals for adult population as a whole

Traceability validation of six enzyme measurements on the Abbott Alinity c analytical system

Background: Laboratory professionals should independently verify the correct implementation of metrological traceability of commercial measuring systems and determine if their performance is fit for purpose. We evaluated the trueness, uncertainty of measurements, and transferability of six clinically important enzyme measurements (alanine aminotransferase [ALT], alkaline phosphatase [ALP], aspartate aminotransferase [AST], creatine kinase [CK], \u3b3-glutamyltransferase [\u3b3GT], and lactate dehydrogenase [LDH]) performed on the Abbott Alinity c analytical system. Methods: Target values and associated uncertainties were assigned to three pools for each enzyme by using the International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (IFCC) reference measurement procedures (RMPs) and the pools were then measured on the Alinity system. Bias estimation and regression studies were performed, and the uncertainty associated with Alinity measurements was also estimated, using analytical performance specifications (APS) derived from biological variability of measurands as goals. Finally, to validate the transferability of the obtained results, a comparison study between two Alinity systems located in Milan, Italy, and Bydgoszcz, Poland, was carried out. Results: Correct implementation of traceability to the IFCC RMPs and acceptable measurement uncertainty fulfilling desirable (ALP, AST, LDH) or optimal APS (ALT, CK, \u3b3GT) was verified for all evaluated enzymes. An optimal alignment between the two Alinity systems located in Milan and Bydgoszcz was also found for all enzyme measurements. Conclusions: We confirmed that measurements of ALT, ALP, AST, CK, \u3b3GT, and LDH performed on the Alinity c analytical system are correctly standardized to the IFCC reference measurement systems and the system alignment is consistent between different platforms

Antibacterial Activity of Gentamicin-bonded Gelatin-sealed Polyethylene Terephthalate Vascular Prostheses

AbstractObjectivesTo create an antibiotic-modified vascular prosthesis with a prolonged bactericidal activity, susceptible to endothelialisation.MethodsWe used a covalent method of gentamicin sulphate immobilisation to polyethylene terephthalate prosthesis sealed with gelatin. Antibacterial activity was assayed in Luria-Bertani medium against Staphylococcus aureus, Escherichia coli and Pseudomonas aeruginosa strains. Prosthesis endothelialisation was performed using bovine aorta endothelial cells (BAEC).ResultsGentamicin was bound to vascular prostheses in the amount of 12g per kg of prosthesis. Ninety-seven percent of antibiotic bound in covalent way and remained on the biomaterial for at least 30 days during shaking in PBS solution. Gentamicin-modified prostheses exerted bactericidal or bacteriostatic effect on growth of clinical and reference bacterial strains, prevented biofilm formation and were highly susceptible to endothelialisation. BAEC viability exceeded 90%, which indicated that gentamicin-vascular prostheses were not toxic for these cells.ConclusionsCovalent gentamicin immobilisation resulted in effective antibacterial protection of vascular prostheses against clinical and reference strains of S. aureus, E. coli and P. aeruginosa and allowed for a strong adherence of endothelial cells to antibiotic-modified prostheses

Quantifying atherogenic lipoproteins for lipid-lowering strategies : Consensus-based recommendations from EAS and EFLM

The joint consensus panel of the European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) and the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) recently addressed present and future challenges in the laboratory diagnostics of atherogenic lipoproteins. Total cholesterol, triglycerides, HDL cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, and calculated non-HDL cholesterol (= total - HDL cholesterol) constitute the primary lipid panel for estimating risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and can be measured in the nonfasting state. LDL cholesterol is the primary target of lipid-lowering therapies. For on-treatment follow-up, LDL cholesterol shall be measured or calculated by the same method to attenuate errors in treatment decisions due to marked between-method variations. Lipoprotein(a)-cholesterol is part of measured or calculated LDL cholesterol and should be estimated at least once in all patients at risk of ASCVD, especially in those whose LDL cholesterol decline poorly upon statin treatment. Residual risk of ASCVD even under optimal LDL-lowering treatment should be also assessed by non-HDL cholesterol or apolipoprotein B, especially in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertriglyceridemia (2-10 mmol/L). Non-HDL cholesterol includes the assessment of remnant lipoprotein cholesterol and shall be reported in all standard lipid panels. Additional apolipoprotein B measurement can detect elevated LDL particle numbers often unidentified on the basis of LDL cholesterol alone. Reference intervals of lipids, lipoproteins, and apolipoproteins are reported for European men and women aged 20-100 years. However, laboratories shall flag abnormal lipid values with reference to therapeutic decision thresholds.Peer reviewe

Quantifying atherogenic lipoproteins for lipid-lowering strategies: consensus-based recommendations from EAS and EFLM

The joint consensus panel of the European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) and the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) recently addressed present and future challenges in the laboratory diagnostics of atherogenic lipoproteins. Total cholesterol (TC), triglycerides (TG), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDLC), LDL cholesterol (LDLC), and calculated non-HDLC (=total - HDLC) constitute the primary lipid panel for estimating risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and can be measured in the nonfasting state. LDLC is the primary target of lipid-lowering therapies. For on-treatment follow-up, LDLC shall be measured or calculated by the same method to attenuate errors in treatment decisions due to marked between-method variations. Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)]-cholesterol is part of measured or calculated LDLC and should be estimated at least once in all patients at risk of ASCVD, especially in those whose LDLC declines poorly upon statin treatment. Residual risk of ASCVD even under optimal LDL-lowering treatment should be also assessed by non-HDLC or apolipoprotein B (apoB), especially in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertriglyceridemia (2-10 mmol/L). Non-HDLC includes the assessment of remnant lipoprotein cholesterol and shall be reported in all standard lipid panels. Additional apoB measurement can detect elevated LDL particle (LDLP) numbers often unidentified on the basis of LDLC alone. Reference intervals of lipids, lipoproteins, and apolipoproteins are reported for European men and women aged 20-100 years. However, laboratories shall flag abnormal lipid values with reference to therapeutic decision thresholds

Quantifying atherogenic lipoproteins for lipid-lowering strategies: consensus-based recommendations from EAS and EFLM

The joint consensus panel of the European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) and the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) recently addressed present and future challenges in the laboratory diagnostics of atherogenic lipoproteins. Total cholesterol (TC), triglycerides (TG), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDLC), LDL cholesterol (LDLC), and calculated non-HDLC (=total - HDLC) constitute the primary lipid panel for estimating risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and can be measured in the nonfasting state. LDLC is the primary target of lipid-lowering therapies. For on-treatment follow-up, I.DLC shall be measured or calculated by the same method to attenuate errors in treatment decisions due to marked between-method variations. Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)]-cholesterol is part of measured or calculated LDLC and should be estimated at least once in all patients at risk of ASCVD, especially in those whose LDLC declines poorly upon statin treatment. Residual risk of ASCVD even under optimal LDL-lowering treatment should be also assessed by non-HDLC or apolipoprotein B (apoB), especially in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertriglyceridemia (2-10 mmol/L). Non-HDLC includes the assessment of remnant lipoprotein cholesterol and shall be reported in all standard lipid panels. Additional apoB measurement can detect elevated LDL particle (LDLP) numbers often unidentified on the basis of LDLC alone. Reference intervals of lipids, lipoproteins, and apolipoproteins are reported for European men and women aged 20-100 years. How-ever, laboratories shall flag abnormal lipid values with reference to therapeutic decision thresholds.Afdeling Klinische Chemie en Laboratoriumgeneeskunde (AKCL

Cyanobacterial lipopolysaccharides and human health – a review

Cyanobacterial lipopolysaccharide/s (LPS) are frequently cited in the cyanobacteria literature as toxins responsible for a variety of heath effects in humans, from skin rashes to gastrointestinal, respiratory and allergic reactions. The attribution of toxic properties to cyanobacterial LPS dates from the 1970s, when it was thought that lipid A, the toxic moiety of LPS, was structurally and functionally conserved across all Gram-negative bacteria. However, more recent research has shown that this is not the case, and lipid A structures are now known to be very different, expressing properties ranging from LPS agonists, through weak endotoxicity to LPS antagonists. Although cyanobacterial LPS is widely cited as a putative toxin, most of the small number of formal research reports describe cyanobacterial LPS as weakly toxic compared to LPS from the Enterobacteriaceae. We systematically reviewed the literature on cyanobacterial LPS, and also examined the much lager body of literature relating to heterotrophic bacterial LPS and the atypical lipid A structures of some photosynthetic bacteria. While the literature on the biological activity of heterotrophic bacterial LPS is overwhelmingly large and therefore difficult to review for the purposes of exclusion, we were unable to find a convincing body of evidence to suggest that heterotrophic bacterial LPS, in the absence of other virulence factors, is responsible for acute gastrointestinal, dermatological or allergic reactions via natural exposure routes in humans. There is a danger that initial speculation about cyanobacterial LPS may evolve into orthodoxy without basis in research findings. No cyanobacterial lipid A structures have been described and published to date, so a recommendation is made that cyanobacteriologists should not continue to attribute such a diverse range of clinical symptoms to cyanobacterial LPS without research confirmation