TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of Fully Automated and Semiautomated Systems for Protein Immunofixation Electrophoresis
AU - Napodano, Cecilia
AU - Pocino, Krizia
AU - Gulli, Francesca
AU - Colacicco, Luigi
AU - Santini, Stefano Angelo
AU - Zuppi, Cecilia
AU - Basile, Umberto
PY - 2017
Y1 - 2017
N2 - Background: In order to establish a diagnosis of monoclonal gammopathy, it is necessary to detect and identify monoclonal components. To confirm the immunological nature of the proteins, the next step is to define their composition in heavy and light chains using immunofixation. The purpose of this study was to compare two different instruments, one semiautomated and the other fully automated for serum and urine immunofixation. Methods: We selected 150 sera and 100 urines from patients admitted for routine analysis, which were analyzed by immunofixation to characterize monoclonal components. Results and conclusion: Comparison study showed a difference in the identification of small monoclonal components and hypogammaglobulinemia, in serum and urine, between the two analyzers. We also observed a difference in the length of the electrophoretic pattern that is of considerable importance as it leads to a better resolution of the gamma region, allowing to identify even the smallest monoclonal component that can be easily hide in an oligoclonal pattern. For this reason, there is need to ameliorate commercial immunofixation assays. It is essential to improve data harmonization and standardize measurement procedures in order to guarantee a correct diagnosis for the right patient care.
AB - Background: In order to establish a diagnosis of monoclonal gammopathy, it is necessary to detect and identify monoclonal components. To confirm the immunological nature of the proteins, the next step is to define their composition in heavy and light chains using immunofixation. The purpose of this study was to compare two different instruments, one semiautomated and the other fully automated for serum and urine immunofixation. Methods: We selected 150 sera and 100 urines from patients admitted for routine analysis, which were analyzed by immunofixation to characterize monoclonal components. Results and conclusion: Comparison study showed a difference in the identification of small monoclonal components and hypogammaglobulinemia, in serum and urine, between the two analyzers. We also observed a difference in the length of the electrophoretic pattern that is of considerable importance as it leads to a better resolution of the gamma region, allowing to identify even the smallest monoclonal component that can be easily hide in an oligoclonal pattern. For this reason, there is need to ameliorate commercial immunofixation assays. It is essential to improve data harmonization and standardize measurement procedures in order to guarantee a correct diagnosis for the right patient care.
KW - Automation, Laboratory
KW - Blood Protein Electrophoresis
KW - Blood Proteins
KW - Female
KW - Humans
KW - Immunoelectrophoresis
KW - Immunoglobulin Heavy Chains
KW - Immunoglobulin Light Chains
KW - Male
KW - Paraproteinemias
KW - immunofixation electrophoresis
KW - monoclonal component
KW - system comparison
KW - Automation, Laboratory
KW - Blood Protein Electrophoresis
KW - Blood Proteins
KW - Female
KW - Humans
KW - Immunoelectrophoresis
KW - Immunoglobulin Heavy Chains
KW - Immunoglobulin Light Chains
KW - Male
KW - Paraproteinemias
KW - immunofixation electrophoresis
KW - monoclonal component
KW - system comparison
UR - http://hdl.handle.net/10807/171693
U2 - 10.1002/jcla.22027
DO - 10.1002/jcla.22027
M3 - Article
SN - 0887-8013
VL - 31
SP - N/A-N/A
JO - Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis
JF - Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis
ER -