4.5 Article

Sweating the small stuff: Adequacy and accuracy in sweat chloride determination

期刊

CLINICAL BIOCHEMISTRY
卷 48, 期 6, 页码 443-447

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2014.12.011

关键词

Sweat chloride; Sweat rate; Cystic fibrosis; Biological variability; Limit of quantitation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives: Sweat chloride testing is the gold standard for diagnosis of cystic fibrosis (CF). Our objectives were to: 1) describe variables that determine sweat rate; 2) determine the analytic and diagnostic capacity of sweat chloride analysis across the range of observed sweat rates; and 3) determine the biologic variability of sweat chloride concentration. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed using data from all sweat chloride tests performed at St. Louis Children's Hospital over a 21-month period. Results: A total of 1397 sweat chloride tests (1155 sufficient [>= 75 mg], 242 insufficient [<75 mg]), were performed on 904 individuals. The sweat weight collected from forearms was statistically greater than that collected from legs. There was a negligible correlation between sweat weight and chloride concentration (r=-0.06). The mean individual biologic CV calculated from individuals with two or more sweat collections >= 75 mg was 13.1% (95% CI: 11.3-14.9%; range 0-88%) yielding a reference change value of 36%. Using 60 mmol/L as the diagnostic chloride cutoff, 100% of CF cases were detected whether a minimum sweat weight of 75, 40, or 20 mg was required. Conclusions: 1) Collection of sweat from forearms is preferable to upper legs, particularly in very young infants; 2) sweat chloride concentrations are not highly dependent upon sweat rate; 3) a change in sweat chloride concentration exceeding 36% may be considered a clinically significant response to cystic fibrosis transmembrane receptor targeted therapy, and 4) sweat collections of less than 75 mg provide clinically accurate information. (C) 2014 The Canadian Society of Clinical Chemists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据