[Comparison of plasma total XXXX determinations in 9 French hospital laboratories by using 6 different methods].

@entity1 @entity1255 @entity535 @entity43433 @entity8020
A lot of methods are now available for total plasma @entity1255 (tHcy) determination. Commercial kits using immunoassay, easier to use, begin to supplant in-house laboratory methods. Our aim is to evaluate the interchangeability of tHcy measurements in 9 French hospital laboratories. Six different method types were used: 2 gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS), 2 HPLC with fluorescence detection subdivided in one in-house method and one commercial kit (Bio-Rad ), 3 fluorescence polarization immunoassays (FPIA), 1 enzyme immunoassay, 1 @entity535 analyser, 1 capillary electrophoresis coupled with laser-induced fluorescence detection (EC- @entity8020 ). Each laboratory analysed 41 @entity1 's plasma samples in which 8 samples contained added @entity43433 . Results were analysed for imprecision, recovery, and methodological differences. The mean among-laboratory imprecision (CV) ranged from 12.5 to 18% in function of plasma sample type and was identical to the mean among-method variation. In terms of recovery, we obtained underestimated results with immunoassays. The bias relative to the GC-MS method was less than 12.5% except for two laboratories, one using FPIA assay and the other EC- @entity8020 . In conclusion, the interchangeability of tHcy results between laboratories is not satisfactory and does not allow us to evaluate cardiovascular risk linked to moderate increases of tHcy.
