Clinical Chemistry AACC Online Job Center
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Clinical Chemistry 28: 2299-2305, 1982;
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit an electronic Letter to
the Editor about this paper
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Walker, R. E.
Right arrow Articles by Kwiterovich, P. O.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Walker, R. E.
Right arrow Articles by Kwiterovich, P. O., Jr

Clinical Chemistry, Vol 28, 2299-2305, Copyright © 1982 by American Association for Clinical Chemistry

Evaluation of five enzymic kits for determination of triglyceride concentrations in plasma

RE Walker, PS Bachorik and PO Kwiterovich Jr

We evaluated five commercial enzymic kit methods (methods A-E) for the determination of triglyceride concentrations in plasma, by comparing each with the automated fluorometric procedure of the Lipid Research Clinics Program. Aliquots of 91 to 97 samples were analyzed with each kit and with the comparison method. The results obtained with all five kits were highly correlated with those of the comparison method (r = 0.97-0.99). Group mean triglyceride concentrations as determined with kits A and D did not differ significantly from those assayed with the comparison method. The other three kits gave values 6.5-7.5% higher than those by the comparison method (p less than 0.001). The relative biases between the kit and reference methods did not vary with triglyceride concentration for kits B, D, and E; kits A and C had concentration-dependent biases. Kits D and E were the most nearly precise and had coefficients of variation (CVs) of 3.1% or less. Kit B had CVs of 3.8-4.4%; the remaining two kits had CVs of 5.4-6.7%. On the basis of these results, we judged kits B, D, and E to perform most satisfactorily, from the standpoint of their precision and their concentration-independent relationships to the comparison method.




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1982 by the American Association for Clinical Chemistry.