Keywords
consensus
report
How to Cite
Abstract
Introduction: The clinical protein laboratory is one of the pillars for the characterization, diagnosis and monitoring of various pathologies. However, given the heterogeneity observed both in the methodologies used and in the preparation of the report of protein studies in the survey carried out during the years 2018-2019 in Argentina, the need arises, from the Protein Forum, to write the first consensus on protein laboratory practices. Objective: To present the first clinical laboratory practice guide for the study of serum proteins from the electrophoretic proteinogram. Materials and Methods: The Protein Forum, based on the Argentine Biochemical Association, generated a forum for discussion, where professional specialists in the Protein area meet periodically to agree on criteria that can be used as tools in the transmission of clinical results. Results: These recommendations compile consensus on the preanalytical, analytical and post-analytical stage, providing valuable information on the type of sample, interference, available methodologies, and analysis and report of results. Conclusions: These first national recommendations for the unification of both methodological and results presentation criteria was developed through professional consensus.
References
Rajkumar S, Dimopoulos M, Palumbo A, Blade J, Merlini G, Mateos MV, et al. International Myeloma Working Group updated criteria for the diagnosis of multiple myeloma. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15(12): 538-4.
Tate J, Caldwell G, Daly J, Gillis D, Jenkins M, Jovanovich S,et al. Working Party on Standardised Reporting of Protein Electrophoresis. Recommendations for standardized reporting of protein electrophoresis in Australia and New Zealand. Ann Clin Biochem. 2012;49(Pt 3):242-56
Bootha R, McCudden C, Balionb C, Blasutigc I,Byouhtiauyd I, Rodriguez- Capotee K, et al. Candidate recommendations for protein electrophoresis reporting from the Canadian Society of Clinical Chemists Monoclonal Gammopathy Working Group. Clin Biochem. 2018;51:10-20.
Acastello NE, Arco SE, Baquio MI, Bovone NS, Crispiani IA; De Marco B, et al. State of the art in the protein study field. Results of the survey carried out by the protein forum from October 2018 to March 2019 in Argentina. ByPC; sep-dic 2021; 85(3):26-31//ISSN-e 2684-0359
Pérez Surribas D, Cárdenas Fernández MC, Zapico Muñiz E. Recomendaciones sobre la separación electroforética de las proteínas plasmáticas en el suero. Documentos de la SEQC 2015; 91-104.
World Health Organization. Diagnostic Imaging and Laboratory Technology. ( 2002). Use of anticoagulants in diagnostic laboratory investigations. World Health Organization. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/65957
Carballo L, Carballeira L, Calvo M, Rentería YM, García-Moll X, Martínez-Bru C. Interferencias por contrastes yodados en la electroforesis capilar. Rev Lab Clin. 2010;3:129-35.
Aguzzi F, Allen W, Bienvenu J, Craig WY, Davis AE, Guder W. et al. Serum Proteins in Clinical Medicine. Volume I. Laboratory Section. 1.ª ed. Scarborough: Robert F. Ritchie, M.D.; 1996.
Doménech MV, Hernández A, Ricós C, Minchinela J et al. Variación biológica en patologías: revisión de datos y consecuencias clínicas. Rev Lab Clin 2008;1:17-23.
Gella FJ, Canalías F, Izquierdo S, Martínez V, Sánchez. M. Recomendaciones para la estimación de la incertidumbre de medida en el laboratorio clínico. Documentos de la SEQC. 2009;27-9.
Luraschi P, Infusino I, Merlotti C, Franzini C. Analytical variation in the measurement of serum monoclonal component by capillary electrophoresis. Clin Chim Acta. 2004;349(1-2):151-6.
Osatinsky R. Las proteínas Séricas. 1.ª ed. Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires: Ed Emma Fiorentino Publicaciones Técnicas S.R.L.; 2012. 97 p.
Osatinsky R, Desimone IV, Garnek L. Incidencia de patente oligoclonal en población adulta aparentemente sana. Rev Mex Patol Clin Med Lab. 2004;51(2):90-92.
Osatinsky R, Desimone I, Garnek L. Importancia de la diferenciación de patentes poli, oligo y monoclonales: su valor diagnóstico. Rev. Mexicana de Patología Clínica. 2004;51:167-170.