• The Korean Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology
• /
• v.14 no.2
• /
• pp.190-196
• /
• 2010

Purpose: This study was undertaken to investigate the feasibility of using automated liquid-handling systems equipped with reusable fixed tips in Radioimmunoassays and to demonstrate that the use of an automated pipetting instrument can decrease in the typical daily workload. Materials and Methods: The precisions of the automated pipettor and the manual pipettor were determined gravimetrically (n=30). A total of 30 specimens for HBs Ag were repeatedly pipetted (three replicates) with the automated pipettor and then retested. PSA samples were simultaneously pipetted with either the automated pipettor or the manual pipettor and then analyzed (n=40). Sample carryover test assessed for CA19-9, AFP and HCG when the automated pipettor was used. Pipetting speed of the automated pipettor and the manual pipettor were compared by evaluation of each workload. Results: The precisions coefficients of variation (CV) were 2.1% for the automated pipettor and 1.6% for manual pipettor. The mean cpm and CV for each group of replicates were 41,203 cpm and 3.7% for HBs Ag positive specimens, and 99 cpm and 7.9% for HBs Ag negative specimens, respectively. PSA results showed no significant differences between automated pipettor and manual pipettor (p=0.15, r=0.999). Carryover for CA19-9, AFP and HCG analytes was <0.1 ppm or below the assay limit of detection. Pipetting speed was significantly improved by using the automated instrument. Conclusion: There was no evidence that the use of an automated pipettor adversely affected any of the performance characteristics of the assay. Indeed, routine use of the Tecan automated pipettor has resulted in a decrease in the typical daily workload.

• The Korean Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology
• /
• v.13 no.3
• /
• pp.189-192
• /
• 2009

Purpose: Autopipetting system is an efficient automated equipment pipetting patient samples and reagents for rapid and accurate test. However, it can cause carryover between high concentration sample and low concentration sample. We evaluated carryover contamination of TECAN freedom Evo 100 autopipetting system. Materials and Method: We studied carryover contamination of $\alpha$-fetoprotein (AFP) and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) test on TECAN freedom Evo 100 autopipetting system. Very low concentration control samples were pipetted for comparison to the contaminated very low concentration samples. Then, The contaminated very low concentration samples were pipetted following the high concentration samples were pipetted alternately. The difference of low concentration samples represents carryover. The target value to decide carryover was 1ppm (parts per million). Results: For AFP, the mean values of the uncontaminated control samples and the contaminated samples were less than 0.6 IU/mL (the l imit of detection (LoD)). Carryover did not occur even though the high concentration sample which value was 650000 IU/mL. For CEA, the values of the low concentration control samples and the contaminated samples were less than 0.2 ng/mL (LoD). Carryover did not occur even though the high concentration sample which value was 65,000 ng/mL. Conclusions: Sample carryover was not found on TECAN freedom Evo 100 autopipetting system for AFP, CEA. However, carryover is a potential problem with automated instruments and robotic pipetting systems. Therefore, Clinical laboratories must periodically verify carryover contamination for the accurate and confidential test results.

• The Korean Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology
• /
• v.13 no.3
• /
• pp.181-184
• /
• 2009

Purpose: Automated system that immunoassay examination are used widely. However, sample to sample carryover can cause that the next patient sample is false positive. Materials and Methods: We test HBs Ag, HBs Ab, HBc Ab(IgG) with Automated pipetting system (Tecan). It was placed with very high concentrations followed by saline solution. During this experiment, The fixed tip of Automated system wash With 0.25 moL/L NaOH. The Measurement results of saline solution confirm the occurrence of carryover. Results: Results of saline solution with 0.25 moL/L NaOH cleaning process was measured 100% negative, And results of patient serum with 0.25 moL/L NaOH cleaning process is similar reported results. Conclusion: As Results, 0.25 moL/L NaOH cleaning process was avoid carryover in experiment, And we know results of the hepatitis test did not affected by this solution we recommend 0.25 moL/L NaOH cleaning process as the Prevention of carryover in the automated system with fixed Tips.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.38 no.2
• /
• pp.65-72
• /
• 2013

Objectives: To evaluate the inhibitory effect of ursolic acid (UA)-containing composites on Streptococcus mutans (S. mutans) biofilm. Materials and Methods: Composite resins with five different concentrations (0.04, 0.1, 0.2, 0.5, and 1.0 wt%) of UA (U6753, Sigma Aldrich) were prepared, and their flexural strengths were measured according to ISO 4049. To evaluate the effect of carbohydrate source on biofilm formation, either glucose or sucrose was used as a nutrient source, and to investigate the effect of saliva treatment, the specimen were treated with either unstimulated whole saliva or phosphate-buffered saline (PBS). For biofilm assay, composite disks were transferred to S. mutans suspension and incubated for 24 hr. Afterwards, the specimens were rinsed with PBS and sonicated. The colony forming units (CFU) of the disrupted biofilm cultures were enumerated. For growth inhibition test, the composites were placed on a polystyrene well cluster, and S. mutans suspension was inoculated. The optical density at 600 nm ($OD_{600}$) was recorded by Infinite F200 pro apparatus (TECAN). One-way ANOVA and two-way ANOVA followed by Bonferroni correction were used for the data analyses. Results: The flexural strength values did not show significant difference at any concentration (p > 0.01). In biofilm assay, the CFU score decreased as the concentration of UA increased. The influence of saliva pretreatment was conflicting. The sucrose groups exhibited higher CFU score than glucose group (p < 0.05). In bacterial growth inhibition test, all experimental groups containing UA resulted in complete inhibition. Conclusions: Within the limitations of the experiments, UA included in the composite showed inhibitory effect on S. mutans biofilm formation and growth.

• The Korean Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology
• /
• v.23 no.2
• /
• pp.51-58
• /
• 2019

Purpose In in-vitro laboratories of nuclear medicine department, when the reagent lot or reagent lot changes Comparability test or parallel test is performed to determine whether the results between lots are reliable. The most commonly used standard domestic laboratories is to obtain %difference from the difference in results between two lots of reagents, and then many laboratories are set the standard to less than 20% at low concentrations and less than 10% at medium and high concentrations. If the range is deviated from the standard, the test is considered failed and it is repeated until the result falls within the standard range. In this study, several tests are selected that are performed in nuclear medicine in-vitro laboratories to analyze parallel test results and to establish criteria for customized percent difference for each test. Materials and Methods From January to November 2018, the result of parallel test for reagent lot change is analyzed for 7 items including thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH), free thyroxine (FT4), carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), CA-125, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), HBs-Ab and Insulin. The RIA-MAT 280 system which adopted the principle of IRMA is used for TSH, FT4, CEA, CA-125 and PSA. TECAN automated dispensing equipment and GAMMA-10 is used to measure insulin test. For the test of HBs-Ab, HAMILTON automated dispensing equipment and Cobra Gamma ray measuring instrument are used. Separate reagent, customized calibrator and quality control materials are used in this experiment. Results 1. TSH [%diffrence Max / Mean / Median] (P-value by t-test > 0.05) C-1(low concentration) [14.8 / 4.4 / 3.7 / 0.0 ] C-2(middle concentration) [10.1 / 4.2 / 3.7 / 0.0] 2. FT4 [%diffrence Max / Mean / Median] (P-value by t-test > 0.05) C-1(low concentration) [10.0 / 4.2 / 3.9 / 0.0] C-2(high concentration) [9.6 / 3.3 / 3.1 / 0.0 ] 3. CA-125 [%diffrence Max / Mean / Median] (P-value by t-test > 0.05) C-1(middle concentration) [9.6 / 4.3 / 4.3 / 0.3] C-2(high concentration) [6.5 / 3.5 / 4.3 / 0.4] 4. CEA [%diffrence Max / Mean / median] (P-value by t-test > 0.05) C-1(low concentration) [9.8 / 4.2 / 3.0 / 0.0] C-2(middle concentration) [8.7 / 3.7 / 2.3 / 0.3] 5. PSA [%diffrence Max / Mean / Median] (P-value by t-test > 0.05) C-1(low concentration) [15.4 / 7.6 / 8.2 / 0.0] C-2(middle concentration) [8.8 / 4.5 / 4.8 / 0.9] 6. HBs-Ab [%diffrence Max / Mean / Median] (P-value by t-test > 0.05) C-1(middle concentration) [9.6 / 3.7 / 2.7 / 0.2] C-2(high concentration) [8.9 / 4.1 / 3.6 / 0.3] 7. Insulin [%diffrence Max / Mean / Median] (P-value by t-test > 0.05) C-1(middle concentration) [8.7 / 3.1 / 2.4 / 0.9] C-2(high concentration) [8.3 / 3.2 / 1.5 / 0.1] In some low concentration measurements, the percent difference is found above 10 to nearly 15 percent in result of target value calculated at a lower concentration. In addition, when the value is measured after Standard level 6, which is the highest value of reagents in the dispensing sequence, the result would have been affected by a hook effect. Overall, there was no significant difference in lot change of quality control material (p-value>0.05). Conclusion Variations between reagent lots are not large in immunoradiometric assays. It is likely that this is due to the selection of items that have relatively high detection rate in the immunoradiometric method and several remeasurements. In most test results, the difference was less than 10 percent, which was within the standard range. TSH control level 1 and PSA control level 1, which have low concentration target value, exceeded 10 percent more than twice, but it did not result in a value that was near 20 percent. As a result, it is required to perform a longer period of observation for more homogenized average results and to obtain laboratory-specific acceptance criteria for each item. Also, it is advised to study observations considering various variables.