|= Emerging. More than 5 years before clinical availability. (19.16%)|
|= Expected to be clinically available in 1 to 4 years. (41.38%)|
|= Clinically available now. (39.46%)|
|Percent of confirmed presenters indicating Clinical Use Status: 100.00%|
Authors: Yuzi (Emma) Zheng (1), Philip Hunek (1), Mitchell McCale (1), Sihe Wang (1, 2) and Adam J. McShane (1)
The relative humidity fluctuates greatly in our clinical mass spectrometry laboratory. The lower relative humidity levels are below the manufacturer’s acceptance range of 40% to 70%. To determine the effect of humidity on test results and potentially establish a wider acceptable relative humidity range, the performance of quality control (QC) versus relative humidity was monitored. The QC results were from a urine pain management panel analyzed on liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) platforms. The gathered results had corresponding relative humidity readings from 26.4% to 59.6%. The QC results at all relative humidity readings were found to be within the 95% confidence interval of in-acceptance criteria QC analysis. Thus, the humidity range may be extended beyond the manufacture’s acceptable range.
Relative humidity fluctuates in the clinical mass spectrometry laboratory and will periodically fall outside the manufacture’s acceptable range. The fluctuation is due in large to the climate at our geographic location and insufficient compensation from the air-handling system.
• Urine pain management LC-MS/MS panel
• Nineteen analytes analyzed in one method
• Two identical LC-MS/MS platforms
• Relative humidity readings were taken at times corresponding with QC analysis over 17 days, relative humidity range from 26.4% to 59.6%
• QC results for 19 analytes within one LC-MS/MS run were obtained over extreme fluctuations in relative humidity
• Statistical analysis based on the 95% confidence interval was performed
Relative humidity was assessed during QC analysis. QC results for 19 analytes, within one LC-MS/MS analysis, were obtained over extreme fluctuations in relative humidity. Statistical analysis was performed to evaluate the effect of relative humidity outside the manufacturer’s acceptable range.
QC results were acceptable and within the 95% confidence interval at relative humidity levels below the acceptable range provided by the manufacturer. A similar approach could be applied to evaluate relative humidity levels higher than the acceptable range or to other non-mass spectrometer instruments.
References & Acknowledgements:
IP Royalty: no
|Planning to mention or discuss specific products or technology of the company(ies) listed above:||