Why the study?
Does an automated immunoinhibition assay for CK-MB estimation match the diagnostic accuracy for myocardial infarction compared to electrophoresis in coronary-care patients?
Does an automated immunoinhibition assay for CK-MB estimation match the diagnostic accuracy for myocardial infarction compared to electrophoresis in coronary-care patients?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The automated immunoinhibition technique for CK-MB estimation provides a rapid, precise, and sensitive alternative to electrophoresis for diagnosing myocardial infarction.
We detected the presence of creatine kinase (EC 2.7.3.2) MB isoenzyme (CK-MB) in serum by using an immunoinhibition technique to inactivate the creatine kinase isoenzyme of muscle origin (CK-MM). The GEMSAEC centrifugal analyzer is ideally suited for this procedure because it rapidly mixes reagents and has a throughput of 60 samples/h. The within-run CV was acceptable when the CK-MB value was 7.5 U/L or more. CK-MM was totally inactivated up to 5000 U/L, a value well above that usually seen in myocardial-infarct patients. We assessed the predictability of the assay for detecting myocardial infarction among 120 coronary-care patients when 2% of total CK activity was considered diagnostic and compared the results with those obtained with an electrophoresis technique. The positive predictive value of the immunoinhibition assay was 97.8%, as compared to 92% with the CK electrophoresis technique, when lactate dehydrogenase (EC 1.1.1.27) isoenzyme results were included in both cases. The optimal negative predictive value was 95.1% with the immunoinhibition assay vs 98.2% with electrophoresis. We conclude that the immunoinhibition technique for estimating CK-MB can be automated to assess myocardial status rapidly, precisely, inexpensively, and sensitively.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Delahunty et al. (1980) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: