Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter October 16, 2018

Differences in procalcitonin measurements between three BRAHMS-partnered immunoassays (Liaison, Elecsys and Architect)

  • Abass Eidizadeh , Abdul R. Asif , Nicolas von Ahsen , Lutz Binder and Moritz Schnelle EMAIL logo

Corresponding author: Moritz Schnelle, MD, PhD, Institute for Clinical Chemistry, University Medical Center Goettingen, Robert-Koch-Str. 40, 37075 Goettingen, Germany, Phone: +49-551-3965510

  1. Author contributions: All the authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this submitted manuscript and approved submission.

  2. Research funding: None declared.

  3. Employment or leadership: None declared.

  4. Honorarium: None declared.

  5. Competing interests: The funding organization(s) played no role in the study design; in the collection, analysis and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; or in the decision to submit the report for publication.

References

1. Singer M, Deutschman CS, Seymour CW, Shankar-Hari M, Annane D, Bauer M, et al. The Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3). J Am Med Assoc 2016;315:801–10.10.1001/jama.2016.0287Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

2. Sager R, Kutz A, Mueller B, Schuetz P. Procalcitonin-guided diagnosis and antibiotic stewardship revisited. BMC Med 2017;15:15.10.1186/s12916-017-0795-7Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

3. Dipalo M, Guido L, Micca G, Pittalis S, Locatelli M, Motta A, et al. Multicenter comparison of automated procalcitonin immunoassays. Pract Lab Med 2015;2:22–8.10.1016/j.plabm.2015.07.001Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

4. Hausfater P, Brochet C, Freund Y, Charles V, Bernard M. Procalcitonin measurement in routine emergency medicine practice: comparison between two immunoassays. Clin Chem Lab Med 2010;48:501–4.10.1515/CCLM.2010.091Search in Google Scholar PubMed

5. Ceriotti F, Marino I, Motta A, Carobene A. Analytical evaluation of the performances of Diazyme and BRAHMS procalcitonin applied to Roche Cobas in comparison with BRAHMS PCT-sensitive Kryptor. Clin Chem Lab Med 2017;56:162–9.10.1515/cclm-2017-0159Search in Google Scholar PubMed

6. Sanders RJ, Schoorl M, Dekker E, Snijders D, Boersma WG, Ten Boekel E. Evaluation of a new procalcitonin assay for the Siemens ADVIA Centaur with the established method on the B.R.A.H.M.S Kryptor. Clin Lab 2011;57:415–20.Search in Google Scholar

7. Kutz A, Hausfater P, Oppert M, Alan M, Grolimund E, Gast C, et al. Comparison between B.R.A.H.M.S PCT direct, a new sensitive point-of-care testing device for rapid quantification of procalcitonin in emergency department patients and established reference methods – a prospective multinational trial. Clin Chem Lab Med 2016;54:577–84.10.1515/cclm-2015-0437Search in Google Scholar PubMed

8. Prieto B, Alvarez FV. Lack of transferability of results between procalcitonin assays. Clin Chem 2009;55: 2226–7.10.1373/clinchem.2009.132605Search in Google Scholar PubMed

9. Fortunato A. A new sensitive automated assay for procalcitonin detection: LIAISON((R)) BRAHMS PCT((R)) II GEN. Pract Lab Med 2016;6:1–7.10.1016/j.plabm.2016.06.002Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

10. Schuetz P, Bretscher C, Bernasconi L, Mueller B. Overview of procalcitonin assays and procalcitonin-guided protocols for the management of patients with infections and sepsis. Expert Rev Mol Diagn 2017;17:593–601.10.1080/14737159.2017.1324299Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Received: 2018-08-24
Accepted: 2018-09-13
Published Online: 2018-10-16
Published in Print: 2019-08-27

©2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 25.4.2024 from https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/cclm-2018-0916/html
Scroll to top button