↓ Skip to main content

Immunoassay quantification of human insulin added to ternary parenteral nutrition containers: comparison of two methods

Overview of attention for article published in Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 Mendeley
Title
Immunoassay quantification of human insulin added to ternary parenteral nutrition containers: comparison of two methods
Published in
Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry, March 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00216-017-0311-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Héloïse Henry, Damien Lannoy, Nicolas Simon, David Seguy, Michèle D’Herbomez, Christine Barthélémy, Bertrand Décaudin, Thierry Dine, Pascal Odou

Abstract

Adding insulin directly into infusion bags seems to be a useful method for controlling hyperglycemia in patients under ternary parenteral nutrition (TPN). Its efficacy is assessed by glycemic monitoring but few data are available on insulin stability in this situation. Among the various methods for quantifying insulin levels in human serum, the immunoassay ones seemed potentially appropriate for a TPN admixture containing high lipid concentrations. We sought to identify and validate which of two immunoassay methods was the better to quantify human insulin and consequently be adapted to studying its stability in a TPN admixture. Two immunoassay methods to quantify recombinant human insulin were assessed in industrial TPN: an immunoradiometric assay (IRMA) and an immunoelectrochemiluminometric assay (IECMA). Validation trials for both methods were based on the accuracy profile method. Interference with immunometric assays due to the high lipidic content of TPN was eliminated through an improved preparation protocol using a bovine serum albumin (BSA) diluted in phosphate buffer saline (PBS). The relative total error of IECMA varied from 1.74 to 4.52% while it varied from -0.32 to 8.37% with IRMA. Only IECMA provided an accuracy profile with a 95% confidence interval of calculated-tolerance limits falling between the chosen acceptance limits (i.e., total error ≤±10%). IECMA combined with a BSA dilution is a simple and semi-automatic method that provides an accurate quantification of human insulin in a TPN admixture without any interference from lipids.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 7 41%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 18%
Other 1 6%
Professor 1 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 3 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 35%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 3 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 March 2017.
All research outputs
#22,834,739
of 25,461,852 outputs
Outputs from Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry
#7,570
of 9,646 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#283,808
of 323,436 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry
#90
of 137 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,461,852 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,646 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 323,436 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 137 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.