SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Türk Biyokimya Dergisi / 2021 / Cilt: 46 - Sayı: 5

Biological variation and reference change value data for serum copper, zinc and selenium in Turkish adult population

Ceylan BAL
Serpil ERDOĞAN
Gamze GÖK
Cemil NURAL
Betül ÖZBEK
Özcan EREL
Müjgan ERCAN
Muhittin A. SERDAR
Pages
587–592
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Conclusions: According to the results of this study, tradi- tional reference intervals can be used for copper but we do not recommend using it for zinc and selenium.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objectives: Calculation of biological variation (BV) com- ponents is very important in evaluating whether a test result is clinically significant.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Methods: A total of 10 serum samples were collected from each of the 15 healthy individuals (nine female, six male), once a week, during 10 weeks.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusions: According to the results of this study, tradi- tional reference intervals can be used for copper but we do not recommend using it for zinc and selenium.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Objectives: Calculation of biological variation (BV) com- ponents is very important in evaluating whether a test result is clinically significant. The aim of this study is to analyze BV components for copper, zinc and selenium in a cohort of healthy Turkish participants. Methods: A total of 10 serum samples were collected from each of the 15 healthy individuals (nine female, six male), once a week, during 10 weeks. Copper, zinc and selenium levels were analyzed by atomic absorption spectrometer. BV parameters were calculated with the approach sug- gested by Fraser. Results: Analytical variation (CV A), within-subject BV (CV I ), between-subject BV (CV G) values were 8.4, 7.1 and 4.3 for copper; 4.2, 9.1 and 13.7 for zinc; 7.6, 2.5 and 6.9 for selenium, respectively. Reference change values (RCV) were 30.46, 27.56 and 22.16% for copper, zinc and sele- nium, respectively. The index of individuality (II) values were 1.65, 0.66 and 0.36 for copper, zinc and selenium, respectively. Conclusions: According to the results of this study, tradi- tional reference intervals can be used for copper but we do not recommend using it for zinc and selenium. We think that it would be more accurate to use RCV value for zinc and selenium in terms of following significant changes in recurrent results of a patient.

🔖

Cite This Article

BAL, C., ERDOĞAN, S., GÖK, G., NURAL, C., ÖZBEK, B., EREL, Ö., ERCAN, M., SERDAR, M. A. (2021). Biological variation and reference change value data for serum copper, zinc and selenium in Turkish adult population. Türk Biyokimya Dergisi, Cilt: 46 - Sayı: 5, 587–592. https://ajindex.com/articles/399038

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. Campbell R, Hotchkiss S. Carrageenan industry market overview. Tropical seaweed farming trends. Problems and opportunities. Nova Science Publishers, Inc.; 2017:193–205 pp
  2. Vera J, Castro J, Gonzalez A, Moenne A. Seaweed polysaccharides and derived oligosaccharides stimulate defense responses and protection against pathogens in plants. Mar Drugs 2011;9: 2514–25
  3. Besednova NN, Zvyagintseva TN, Kuznetsova TA, Makarenkova ID, Smolina TP, Fedyanina LN, et al. Marine algae metabolites as promising therapeutics for the prevention and treatment of HIV/ AIDS. Metabolites 2019;9:87
  4. Pangestuti R, Kim SK. Biological activities of carrageenan. Adv Food Nutr Res 2014;72:113–24
  5. Wang W, Wang SX, Guan HS. The antiviral activities and mechanisms of marine polysaccharides: an overview. Mar Drugs 2012;10:2795–816
  6. Cherry P, Yadav S, Strain CR, Allsopp PJ, McSorley EM, Ross RP, et al. Prebiotics from seaweeds: an ocean of opportunity? Mar Drugs 2019;17:327
  7. Li L, Ni R, Shao Y, Mao S. Carrageenan and its applications in drug delivery. Carbohydr Polym 2014;103:1–11
  8. David S, Shani Levi C, Fahoum L, Ungar Y, Meyron-Holtz EG, Shpigelman A, et al. Revisiting the carrageenan controversy: do we really understand the digestive fate and safety of carrageenan in our foods? Food Funct 2018;9:1344–52
  9. Bixler HJ. The carrageenan controversy. J Appl Phycol 2017;29: 2201–7
  10. Martino JV, Van Limbergen J, Cahill LE. The role of carrageenan and carboxymethylcellulose in the development of intestinal inflammation. Front Pediatr 2017;5:96
  11. Necas J, Bartosikova L. Carrageenan: a review. Vet Med 2013;58: 187–205
  12. Tobacman JK. Review of harmful gastrointestinal effects of carrageenan in animal experiments. Environ Health Perspect 2001;109:983–94
  13. Wu W, Zhen Z, Niu T, Zhu X, Gao Y, Yan J, et al. κ-Carrageenan enhances lipopolysaccharide-induced interleukin-8 secretion by stimulating the Bcl10-NF-κB pathway in HT-29 cells and aggravates C. freundii-induced inflammation in mice. Mediat Inflamm 2017;2017:8634865
  14. Ogata M, Matsui T, Kita T, Shigematsu A. Carrageenan primes leukocytes to enhance lipopolysaccharide-induced tumor necrosis factor alpha production. Infect Immun 1999;67:3284–9
  15. McKim JM, Willoughby JA Sr., Blakemore WR, Weiner ML. Clarifying the confusion between poligeenan, degraded carrageenan, and carrageenan: a review of the chemistry, nomenclature, and in vivo toxicology by the oral route. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 2018;14:1–20
  16. Barth