Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37583571›Full record

ArticleJournal of mass spectrometry and advances in the clinical lab2023

Automated LC-MS/MS: Ready for the clinical routine Laboratory?

Sina Junger, Miriam Hoene, Maria Shipkova, Gudrun Danzl, Christof Schöberl, Andreas Peter, Rainer Lehmann, Eberhard Wieland, Helmine Braitmaier

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of mass spectrometry and advances in the clinical lab, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
8.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Sina JungerSYNLAB MVZ Leinfelden-Echterdingen GmbH, Leinfelden-Echterdingen, Germany.
Miriam HoeneInstitute for Clinical Chemistry and Pathobiochemistry, Department for Diagnostic Laboratory Medicine, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Maria ShipkovaSYNLAB MVZ Leinfelden-Echterdingen GmbH, Leinfelden-Echterdingen, Germany.
Gudrun DanzlSynlab MVZ Augsburg GmbH, Augsburg, Germany.
Christof SchöberlSYNLAB MVZ Leinfelden-Echterdingen GmbH, Leinfelden-Echterdingen, Germany.
Andreas PeterInstitute for Clinical Chemistry and Pathobiochemistry, Department for Diagnostic Laboratory Medicine, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Rainer LehmannInstitute for Clinical Chemistry and Pathobiochemistry, Department for Diagnostic Laboratory Medicine, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Eberhard WielandSYNLAB MVZ Leinfelden-Echterdingen GmbH, Leinfelden-Echterdingen, Germany.
Helmine BraitmaierSYNLAB MVZ Leinfelden-Echterdingen GmbH, Leinfelden-Echterdingen, Germany.
University of Tübingen · DESynlab (Germany) · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) is a sensitive method with high specificity. However, its routine use in the clinical laboratory is hampered by its high complexity and lack of automation. Studies demonstrate excellent analytical performance using the first fully automated LC-MS/MS for 25-hydroxy vitamin D and immunosuppressant drugs (ISD) in hospital routine laboratories. Objectives: Our objectives were (1) to verify the suitability of an automated LC-MS/MS in a commercial laboratory, which differs from the needs of hospital laboratories, and (2) examine its usability among operators with various professional backgrounds. Methods: We assessed the analytical assay performance for vitamin D and the ISDs cyclosporine A and tacrolimus over five months. The assays were compared to an identical analyzer in a hospital laboratory, to in-house LC-MS/MS methods, and to chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassays (CMIA). Nine operators evaluated the usability of the fully automated LC-MS/MS system by means of a structured questionnaire. Results: The automated system exhibited a high precision (CV < 8%), accuracy (bias < 7%) and good agreement with concentrations of external quality assessment (EQA) samples. Comparable results were obtained with an identical analyzer in a hospital routine laboratory. Acceptable median deviations of results versus an in-house LC-MS/MS were observed for 25-OH vitamin D3 (-10.6%), cyclosporine A (-4.3%) and tacrolimus (-6.6%). The median bias between the automated system and immunoassays was only acceptable for 25-OH vitamin D3 (6.6%). All users stated that they had had a good experience with the fully automated LC-MS/MS system. Conclusions: A fully automated LC-MS/MS can be easily integrated for routine diagnostics in a commercial laboratory.

Indexed as

AutomationCascadion analyzerCyclosporine ALC-MS/MSTacrolimusVitamin D

Identifiers

PMID37583571
PMCPMC10423925
OpenAlexW4385498261

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.