Hyaluronic Acid Assays: Turbidimetric or Enzyme-Based Immune Assay? A Method Comparison Study

Theis Skovsgaard Itenov, Nikolai S Kirkby, Morten H Bestle, Anna C Nilsson, Erland J Erlandsen, Lars Peters, Jens-Ulrik Jensen

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Backgroud: Hyaluronic acid (HA) is proposed as a marker of functional liver capacity. The aim of the present study was to compare a new turbidimetric assay for measuring HA with the current standard method. Methods: HA was measured by a particle-enhanced turbidimetric immunoassay (PETIA) and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) in a 40-sample dilution series and 39 intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Agreement was assessed with Bland–Altman's method. Results: In the ICU patients, the median HA concentration was 159.0 ng/ml (interquartile range (IQR) 117.5–362.5 ng/ml) with ELISA and 157.5 ng/ml (IQR 92.5–359.6 ng/ml) with PETIA. The mean difference was 12.88 ng/ml (95% CI, −4.3 to 30.1 ng/ml, P = 0.14) and the 95% limits of agreement were −91.17 to 116.9 ng/ml. In the dilution series, the mean difference was −59.26 ng/ml (95% CI, −74.68 to 43.84 ng/ml, P < 0.0001) and the 95% limits of agreement were 35.23 to −153.8 ng/ml. Conclusion: We found random variation between the PETIA and ELISA test that could affect performance in a clinical context, but only to a lesser extent in a research context. The new clinical biochemistry assay for HA determination will allow for large studies of the clinical utility of HA.

Original languageEnglish
JournalJournal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis
Volume30
Issue number5
Pages (from-to)524–528
Number of pages5
ISSN0887-8013
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Sept 2016

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Hyaluronic Acid Assays: Turbidimetric or Enzyme-Based Immune Assay? A Method Comparison Study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this