Comparison of creatinine measurement methods developed for "true" creatinine gerçek kreatinin ölçümü i̇çin geliştirilen kreatinin ölçüm yöntemlerinin karşılaştırılması
Turkish Journal of Biochemistry, cilt.36, sa.4, ss.356-361, 2011 (SCI-Expanded, Scopus, TRDizin)
- Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
- Cilt numarası: 36 Sayı: 4
- Basım Tarihi: 2011
- Dergi Adı: Turkish Journal of Biochemistry
- Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, TR DİZİN (ULAKBİM)
- Sayfa Sayıları: ss.356-361
- Anahtar Kelimeler: Chronic kidney disease, Creatinine, Glomerular filtration rate, Method comparison, Standardization
- Lokman Hekim Üniversitesi Adresli: Hayır
Özet
Objective: Commonly used creatinine methods are based on Jaffe reaction. Jaffe reaction is interfered by various interferents. Our aim was to improve and automate "true" creatini-ne measurement methods based on Jaffe reaction and to compare the performance of these methods.Methods: Sera were collected from patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD, n = 102) and healthy controls (n = 37). Creatinine was measured by enzymatic method, kinetic method based on Jaffe reaction, acidification method, and "buffered methods" [(pH 7.8, Buffered1) and (pH 9.65, Buffered2)] and a method based on creatinine adsorption to Fuller's earth. Enzymatic method was considered as a reference in method comparison.Results: All the methods used gave lower creatinine concentrations than Jaffe kinetic method. Relationships between enzymatic method (x) and the others (y) were as following: Kinetic method: 0.24 + 0.98x; acidification method: 0.27 + 0.87x; Buffered1: 0.22 + 0.91x; Buffe-red2: 0.10 + 0.96x and adsorption method: 0.10 + 0.96x.Conclusions: All methods can be automated except adsorption method. Performance of the methods is comparable with Jaffe kinetic and enzymatic methods. Among the methods, Buf-fered2 is the best compatible with enzymatic method. It is cheaper, suitable for routine studies and it can be automated. © TurkJBiochem.com.