| People | Locations | Statistics |
|---|---|---|
| Naji, M. |
| |
| Motta, Antonella |
| |
| Aletan, Dirar |
| |
| Mohamed, Tarek |
| |
| Ertürk, Emre |
| |
| Taccardi, Nicola |
| |
| Kononenko, Denys |
| |
| Petrov, R. H. | Madrid |
|
| Alshaaer, Mazen | Brussels |
|
| Bih, L. |
| |
| Casati, R. |
| |
| Muller, Hermance |
| |
| Kočí, Jan | Prague |
|
| Šuljagić, Marija |
| |
| Kalteremidou, Kalliopi-Artemi | Brussels |
|
| Azam, Siraj |
| |
| Ospanova, Alyiya |
| |
| Blanpain, Bart |
| |
| Ali, M. A. |
| |
| Popa, V. |
| |
| Rančić, M. |
| |
| Ollier, Nadège |
| |
| Azevedo, Nuno Monteiro |
| |
| Landes, Michael |
| |
| Rignanese, Gian-Marco |
|
Hassanpour, N.
in Cooperation with on an Cooperation-Score of 37%
Topics
Publications (1/1 displayed)
Places of action
| Organizations | Location | People |
|---|
article
Post-mortem blood lead analysis; a comparison between LeadCare II and graphite furnace atomic absorption spectrometry analysis results.
Abstract
<h4>Purpose</h4>A comparison of the LeadCare II (LCII) point-of-care (POC) device with the gold standard graphite furnace atomic absorption spectroscopy (GFAAS) device was done in the context of post-mortem blood lead concentrations to determine comparability for screening value.<h4>Methods</h4>Consecutive autopsy cases from March 2018 to March 2019 were examined by the forensic medicine center. Blood samples with lead concentrations <10 μg dL<sup>-1</sup> by LCII analysis were excluded from GFAAS analysis. Samples were collected from femoral veins or cardiac chambers. Bland-Altman analysis was conducted to evaluate the agreement between both GFAAS and LCII lead values. Linear regression modeling was performed to predict GFAAS results based on LCII results. Five-hundred post-mortem blood samples were evaluated by LCII for blood lead. For 46 cases with LCII blood lead level (BLL) values more than 10 μg dL<sup>-1</sup>, further analysis was performed by GFAAS.<h4>Results</h4>Mean difference of BLL between the two methods was 5.92 μg dL<sup>-1</sup> (SD = 7.51; range: -14 to 23.7). GFAAS BLL values were significantly higher than LCII values (p = 0.029). Moreover, substance-user samples had significantly higher GFAAS BLLs (p = 0.006; mean difference = 11.62 μg dL<sup>-1</sup>). A significant regression equation was found (F [1, 44] = 108.44, p < 0.001, with an R2 of 0.711). Based on Bland-Altman plot averages for both predicted GFAAS BLL and measured GFASS BLL showed a mean difference was 0.014 (SD = 7.51; range: -17.9 to 20).<h4>Conclusion</h4>In conclusion, on post-mortem BLL samples, LCII and GFAAS show favorable correlation. LCII can be used as a screening technique for post-mortem blood lead analysis.