Four automated natriuretic peptide assays demonstrated acceptable analytic performance, with analytic concordance to the Triage meter ranging from 84.3% to 95.9%.
Four automated natriuretic peptide assays demonstrated acceptable analytic performance and concordance with the Triage meter BNP assay.
Measurement of circulating B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and N-terminal proBNP (NT-proBNP) can identify patients with heart failure and guide therapy. The limit of detection, linearity, imprecision, method comparison, analytic concordance, and reference intervals of the Access 2 BNP (Biosite, San Diego, CA), ADVIA Centaur BNP (Bayer Diagnostics, Tarrytown, NY), AxSYM BNP (Abbott Diagnostics, Abbott Park, IL), and E170 NT-proBNP (Roche Diagnostics, Indianapolis, IN) methods were evaluated. The Triage meter BNP assay (Biosite) was the comparison method. Imprecision testing showed total coefficients of variation of 4.1%, 4.4%, 5.5%, and 0.8% for the Access 2, ADVIA Centaur, AxSYM, and E170, respectively. Relative to the Triage meter, method comparison revealed a slope of 0.96 and r = 0.95, a slope of 0.77 and r = 0.92, a slope of 1.13 and r = 0.94, and a slope of 8.8 and r = 0.80 for the Access 2, ADVIA Centaur, AxSYM, and E170, respectively. Overall analytic concordance values with the Triage meter were 95.9%, 92.9%, 92.4%, and 84.3% for the Access 2, ADVIA Centaur, AxSYM, and E170, respectively. All automated natriuretic peptide methods showed acceptable analytic performance.
Rawlins et al. (Tue,) conducted a other in Heart failure. Automated natriuretic peptide assays (Access 2, ADVIA Centaur, AxSYM, E170) vs. Triage meter BNP assay was evaluated on Analytic concordance with the Triage meter. Four automated natriuretic peptide assays demonstrated acceptable analytic performance, with analytic concordance to the Triage meter ranging from 84.3% to 95.9%.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: