摘要
目的通过用两种不同试剂对凝血4项的检测,了解同一血凝仪不同试剂检测结果的差异。方法通过对20例外科患者、2例内科患者和21例妇产科患者,抽取静脉血液分离血浆同时用北京豪迈和上海太阳两种试剂,在德国BE单孔半自动血凝仪上分别测定凝血酶原时间(PT)、活化部分凝血活酶时间(APTT)、凝血酶时间(TT)、纤维蛋白原(FIB)。同时9次测定时用正常和异常质控液分别测定。对比观察每一组利用上述两种不同试剂测定结果之间的差异。结果对43例标本及9个正常、异常值质控用两种试剂测定结果,TT、FIB比较差异有统计学意义,结果不具可比性。PT、APTT对于43例正常值标本比较差异无统计学意义,结果具可比性,但对于PT异常值,北京豪迈试剂优于上海太阳试剂。结论用BE单通道血凝仪检测凝血4项,北京豪迈试剂优于上海太阳试剂,对于孕妇FIB用北京豪迈结果较为敏感。
Objective To research the existence of any difference between the results using different reagents on the same coagulation analyzer in coagulation test.Methods 20 surgical patients,2 internal medicine patients and 21 obstetrics and gynecology patients were taken venous plasma.By using two reagents produced by Beijing Hammar and Shanghai Solar,we tested prothrombin time（PT）,and activated partial thromboplastin time（APTT）,thrombin time（TT）,fibrinogen on the BE single hole semi-automatic coagulometer.Then we conducted nine tests with normal and abnormal quality control simultaneously,and observed the results of each group tested by these two different reagents.Results The results of 43 specimens and 9 normal and abnormal quality control values were tested by the two reagents,and the difference between TT and FIB was statistically significant,and the results were not comparable.The difference between PT,APTT from 43 normal samples was not statistically significant,and the results was comparable,but Beijing hammer reagent precedes Shanghai solar one in testing the abnormal value for PT.Conclusion When we use BE single-channel coagulation to detect four items of coagulation,Beijing hammer reagent precedes Shanghai solar one,but for the pregnant women,the result of FIB from Beijing hammer reagent is more sensitive than that of the Shanghai solar one.
出处
《检验医学与临床》
CAS
2011年第8期928-928,931,共2页
Laboratory Medicine and Clinic
