Comparison of seven different reagents of peroxidase method for small and dense low density lipoprotein cholesterol (sdLDL-C) measurement

• Main Authors: Enshi, W. (Author), Hui, Y. (Author), Jianxun, H. (Author), Lei, Z. (Author), Xiaoli, Z. (Author), Xuesong, F. (Author)
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: John Wiley and Sons Inc 2021
• Subjects: adult; Adult; aged; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Article; blood; blood analysis; Blood Chemical Analysis; blood sampling; chemistry; China; Cholesterol, LDL; comparative study; correlational study; devices; dyes, reagents, indicators, markers and buffers; female; Female; human; Humans; Indicators and Reagents; laboratory test; limit of detection; Limit of Detection; low density lipoprotein cholesterol; low density lipoprotein cholesterol level; major clinical study; male; Male; method comparison; middle aged; Middle Aged; peroxidase; Peroxidase; peroxidase method; procedures; protein analysis; reference interval; reproducibility; Reproducibility of Results; small and dense low density lipoprotein cholesterol; very elderly
• Online Access: View Fulltext in Publisher

 Background: We validated the performance of seven different reagents of peroxidase method for sdLDL-C in two automatic analyzers that are common in Chinese laboratories. Methods: Seven commercially available sdLDL-C assays were analyzed with the Beckman AU5400 and Mindray BS2000 automatic analyzers. A total of 336 blood samples were collected and the reference interval was also validated in 298 apparently healthy individuals. Serum samples were used for method comparison of precision, recovery, lower limit of detection, comparison and concurrence analysis, as well as reference interval for the Mindray reagent. Results: The repeatability CV% of the seven sdLDL-C assays were 0.81%~3.66% for Mindray BS2000 and 0.76%~3.91% for Beckman AU5400, while Total CVs for Mindray BS2000 sdLDL-C assay were 1.34%~4.81%, and that of Beckman AU5400 were 2.25%~10.33%. The measured recovery rates of sdLDL-C assays were within the allowable ±10% deviation range. There was no obvious difference between the reagents in the lower limit detection. There was a difference between the validation results of the reference range and the manufacturer's.BSBE, Mindray, and Dongou had a high degree of association with DENKA SEIKEN on Mindray BS2000, while BSBE, Mindray, Dongou and Merit Choice had a high degree of association with DENKA SEIKEN on Beckman AU5400. Passing–Bablok regression showed excellent linear correlation between BSBE and Mindray and DENKA SEIKEN and on Beckman AU5400. Conclusions: Our results indicate that the basic performance can meet the testing requirements, but the comparability between them is still insufficient. © 2020 The Authors. Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.