Az endokrin laboratoriumi lelet ertekelese

Translated title of the contribution: Evaluating endocrine laboratory findings

G. Kovács, T. Erzsebet, L. Zoltan

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

The clinical value of hormonal laboratory findings is determined by many more factors than of the conventional (non-endocrine) parameters. The increased complexity is partly due to the physiological and pathophysiological properties of hormonal biomolecules as well as to the characteristic differences in the analytical methods. Correct interpretation of the endocrine results requires the consideration of potential preanalytical errors and the collection and handling of samples done more carefully. Because of the low physiological concentrations of hormones, only microanalytical methods can be used. Endocrine parameters in clinical laboratories are usually measured with immunoassay methods these days. Due to the assay characteristics of these methods (e.g. cross-reactivity of the antibodies, specificity, technology-dependent differences in sensitivity), numerical values appearing on the laboratory reports - particularly if not accompanied with additional information - may be incorrectly interpreted by the clinicians. Therefore, plausibility control should be an integral part of the post-analytical tasks of a laboratory. The authors evaluate these specialties based on their own analytical and clinical experience as well as on literature data. It is concluded that correct endocrine laboratory report should contain not only data on reference values, but also the confidentiality limits of the given endocrine test. Subnormal values, provided they are of clinical relevance, should be evaluated together with the variation coefficient and the functional sensitivity, measured specifically in this lower range. The frequently asked question, whether a difference in endocrine results is due to biological factors determined by a disease, or to analytical problems, is particularly important when using dynamic tests.

Original languageHungarian
Pages (from-to)114-124
Number of pages11
JournalLege Artis Medicinae
Volume10
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 2000

Fingerprint

Antibody Specificity
Confidentiality
Biological Factors
Immunoassay
Reference Values
Hormones
Technology

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Kovács, G., Erzsebet, T., & Zoltan, L. (2000). Az endokrin laboratoriumi lelet ertekelese. Lege Artis Medicinae, 10(2), 114-124.

Az endokrin laboratoriumi lelet ertekelese. / Kovács, G.; Erzsebet, T.; Zoltan, L.

In: Lege Artis Medicinae, Vol. 10, No. 2, 2000, p. 114-124.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Kovács, G, Erzsebet, T & Zoltan, L 2000, 'Az endokrin laboratoriumi lelet ertekelese', Lege Artis Medicinae, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 114-124.
Kovács, G. ; Erzsebet, T. ; Zoltan, L. / Az endokrin laboratoriumi lelet ertekelese. In: Lege Artis Medicinae. 2000 ; Vol. 10, No. 2. pp. 114-124.
@article{08c5b2996e4a47909009af651f10194f,
title = "Az endokrin laboratoriumi lelet ertekelese",
abstract = "The clinical value of hormonal laboratory findings is determined by many more factors than of the conventional (non-endocrine) parameters. The increased complexity is partly due to the physiological and pathophysiological properties of hormonal biomolecules as well as to the characteristic differences in the analytical methods. Correct interpretation of the endocrine results requires the consideration of potential preanalytical errors and the collection and handling of samples done more carefully. Because of the low physiological concentrations of hormones, only microanalytical methods can be used. Endocrine parameters in clinical laboratories are usually measured with immunoassay methods these days. Due to the assay characteristics of these methods (e.g. cross-reactivity of the antibodies, specificity, technology-dependent differences in sensitivity), numerical values appearing on the laboratory reports - particularly if not accompanied with additional information - may be incorrectly interpreted by the clinicians. Therefore, plausibility control should be an integral part of the post-analytical tasks of a laboratory. The authors evaluate these specialties based on their own analytical and clinical experience as well as on literature data. It is concluded that correct endocrine laboratory report should contain not only data on reference values, but also the confidentiality limits of the given endocrine test. Subnormal values, provided they are of clinical relevance, should be evaluated together with the variation coefficient and the functional sensitivity, measured specifically in this lower range. The frequently asked question, whether a difference in endocrine results is due to biological factors determined by a disease, or to analytical problems, is particularly important when using dynamic tests.",
keywords = "Analytical limits, Diagnostic value, Functional sensitivity, Individual fluctuation of hormonal parameters",
author = "G. Kov{\'a}cs and T. Erzsebet and L. Zoltan",
year = "2000",
language = "Hungarian",
volume = "10",
pages = "114--124",
journal = "Lege Artis Medicinae",
issn = "0866-4811",
publisher = "Literatura Medica Publishing House",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Az endokrin laboratoriumi lelet ertekelese

AU - Kovács, G.

AU - Erzsebet, T.

AU - Zoltan, L.

PY - 2000

Y1 - 2000

N2 - The clinical value of hormonal laboratory findings is determined by many more factors than of the conventional (non-endocrine) parameters. The increased complexity is partly due to the physiological and pathophysiological properties of hormonal biomolecules as well as to the characteristic differences in the analytical methods. Correct interpretation of the endocrine results requires the consideration of potential preanalytical errors and the collection and handling of samples done more carefully. Because of the low physiological concentrations of hormones, only microanalytical methods can be used. Endocrine parameters in clinical laboratories are usually measured with immunoassay methods these days. Due to the assay characteristics of these methods (e.g. cross-reactivity of the antibodies, specificity, technology-dependent differences in sensitivity), numerical values appearing on the laboratory reports - particularly if not accompanied with additional information - may be incorrectly interpreted by the clinicians. Therefore, plausibility control should be an integral part of the post-analytical tasks of a laboratory. The authors evaluate these specialties based on their own analytical and clinical experience as well as on literature data. It is concluded that correct endocrine laboratory report should contain not only data on reference values, but also the confidentiality limits of the given endocrine test. Subnormal values, provided they are of clinical relevance, should be evaluated together with the variation coefficient and the functional sensitivity, measured specifically in this lower range. The frequently asked question, whether a difference in endocrine results is due to biological factors determined by a disease, or to analytical problems, is particularly important when using dynamic tests.

AB - The clinical value of hormonal laboratory findings is determined by many more factors than of the conventional (non-endocrine) parameters. The increased complexity is partly due to the physiological and pathophysiological properties of hormonal biomolecules as well as to the characteristic differences in the analytical methods. Correct interpretation of the endocrine results requires the consideration of potential preanalytical errors and the collection and handling of samples done more carefully. Because of the low physiological concentrations of hormones, only microanalytical methods can be used. Endocrine parameters in clinical laboratories are usually measured with immunoassay methods these days. Due to the assay characteristics of these methods (e.g. cross-reactivity of the antibodies, specificity, technology-dependent differences in sensitivity), numerical values appearing on the laboratory reports - particularly if not accompanied with additional information - may be incorrectly interpreted by the clinicians. Therefore, plausibility control should be an integral part of the post-analytical tasks of a laboratory. The authors evaluate these specialties based on their own analytical and clinical experience as well as on literature data. It is concluded that correct endocrine laboratory report should contain not only data on reference values, but also the confidentiality limits of the given endocrine test. Subnormal values, provided they are of clinical relevance, should be evaluated together with the variation coefficient and the functional sensitivity, measured specifically in this lower range. The frequently asked question, whether a difference in endocrine results is due to biological factors determined by a disease, or to analytical problems, is particularly important when using dynamic tests.

KW - Analytical limits

KW - Diagnostic value

KW - Functional sensitivity

KW - Individual fluctuation of hormonal parameters

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0034012282&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0034012282&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 10

SP - 114

EP - 124

JO - Lege Artis Medicinae

JF - Lege Artis Medicinae

SN - 0866-4811

IS - 2

ER -