Conference Paper
BibTex RIS Cite

Determination of Reference Intervals For Dihydrorhodamine 123 (DHR) Assay in Healthy Children

Year 2019, Volume: 7 Issue: Ek - IRUPEC 2019 Kongresi Tam Metin Bildirileri, 611 - 616, 10.12.2019

Abstract

This study aimed to determine the reference intervals for dihydrorhodamine 123 (DHR) assay in healthy children.
A total of 100 healthy children, aged between 0 and 18 years and 10 adults, who admitted to Selcuk University Medical Faculty, Department of Pediatrics were included in this study. The DHR assay were evaluated in a total of 11 groups, each group consisting of 10 individuals (0-1 months, 1-3 months, 4-6 months, 7-12 months, 13-24 months, 25-36 months, 3-5 years, 6-8 years, 9-11 years, 12-18 years and adults). DHR assay was performed in peripheral blood samples with EDTA and the cells were immediately evaluated using flow cytometry. The 95% confidence interval was determined according to the mean, minimum, and maximum values obtained from this data.
The stimulation index was observed to vary ranging between 21 and 451 (mean ± SD, 105.9 ± 77). When the difference between the groups was evaluated, it was found that the stimulation index was found to be low in the age group of 1-3 months to compared with the other age groups (p <0.05).
The DHR assay is a reliable method to detect the levels of reactive oxygen radicals, especially hydrogen peroxide. The reference intervals of DHR assay in healthy children were determined in this study.

References

  • References 1. Dimitrova G, Bunkall C, Lim D, Kendrick . Comparison of two methods for the diagnosis of chronic granulomatous disease – neutrophil oxidative burst measured by the nitroblue tetrazolium slide test versus the dihydrorhodamine 123 flow cytometric assay. N Z J Med Lab Sci 2013; 67: 45-51. 2. Jirapongsananuruk O, Malech HL, Kuhns DB, et al. Diagnostic paradigm for evaluation of male patients with chronic granulomatous disease, based on dihydrorhodamine 123 assay. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2003; 111:374-9. 3. Segal BH, Leto TL, Gallin JI, Malech HL, Holland SM. Genetic, biochemical, and clinical features of chronic granulomatous disease. Medicine 2000; 79:170-200. 4. Kilic SS, Ozel M, Hafizoglu D, Karaca NE, Aksu G, Kutukculer N. The prevalances (correction) and patient characteristics of primary immunodeficiency diseases in Turkey-two centers study. J Clin Immunol 2013; 33(1):74-83. 5. Emmendorffer A, Nakamura M, Rothe G, Spiekermann K, Lohmann-Matthes ML, Roessler J. Evaluation of flow cytometric methods for diagnosis of chronic granulomatous disease variants under routine laboratory conditions. Cytometry 1994; 18:147-55. 6. Vowells SJ, Fleisher TA, Sekhsaria S, Alling DW, Maguire TE, Malech HL. Genotype-dependent variability in flow cytometric evaluation of reduced nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate oxidase function in patients with chronic granulomatous disease. J Pediatr 1996; 128:104-7. 7. Koker MY, Sanal O, Leeuwen K, et al. Four different NCF2 mutations in six families from Turkey and overview of NCF2 gene mutations. Eur J Clin Invest 2009; 39(10):942-51. 8. Köker MY. Kronik granulomatoz hastalık ve alt gruplarının tanısında DHR 123 testi ve anti-NADPH oksidaz komponent antikorlarla akım sitometrik analizin yeri. 2006. Doktora tezi, Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara. 9. Çiçekkökü D, Öğülür Ö, Karakoç-Aydıner E et al. Oxidative Burst with Dihydrorhodamine Test: Reference Values in Healthy Controls. Turk J Immunol 2015; 3(2):49-53. 10. Bonilla FA, Bernstein IL, Khan DA et al. Practice parameter for the diagnosis and management of primary immunodeficiency. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2015; 136:1186-205. 11. Bousfiha A, Jeddane L, Picard C et al. The 2017 IUIS Phenotypic Classification for Primary Immunodeficiencies. J Clin Immunol 2018; 38(1):129-43. 12. Kulkarni M, Gupta M, Madkaikar M. Phenotypic Prenatal Diagnosis of Chronic Granulomatous Disease: A Useful Tool in The Absence Of Molecular Diagnosis. Scand J Immunol 2017; 86(6):486-490. 13. Koker MY, Camcıoglu Y, Leeuwen K, et al. Clinical, functional, and genetic characterization of chronic granulomatous diseases in 89 Turkish patients. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2013; 132:1156-63.
Year 2019, Volume: 7 Issue: Ek - IRUPEC 2019 Kongresi Tam Metin Bildirileri, 611 - 616, 10.12.2019

Abstract

References

  • References 1. Dimitrova G, Bunkall C, Lim D, Kendrick . Comparison of two methods for the diagnosis of chronic granulomatous disease – neutrophil oxidative burst measured by the nitroblue tetrazolium slide test versus the dihydrorhodamine 123 flow cytometric assay. N Z J Med Lab Sci 2013; 67: 45-51. 2. Jirapongsananuruk O, Malech HL, Kuhns DB, et al. Diagnostic paradigm for evaluation of male patients with chronic granulomatous disease, based on dihydrorhodamine 123 assay. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2003; 111:374-9. 3. Segal BH, Leto TL, Gallin JI, Malech HL, Holland SM. Genetic, biochemical, and clinical features of chronic granulomatous disease. Medicine 2000; 79:170-200. 4. Kilic SS, Ozel M, Hafizoglu D, Karaca NE, Aksu G, Kutukculer N. The prevalances (correction) and patient characteristics of primary immunodeficiency diseases in Turkey-two centers study. J Clin Immunol 2013; 33(1):74-83. 5. Emmendorffer A, Nakamura M, Rothe G, Spiekermann K, Lohmann-Matthes ML, Roessler J. Evaluation of flow cytometric methods for diagnosis of chronic granulomatous disease variants under routine laboratory conditions. Cytometry 1994; 18:147-55. 6. Vowells SJ, Fleisher TA, Sekhsaria S, Alling DW, Maguire TE, Malech HL. Genotype-dependent variability in flow cytometric evaluation of reduced nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate oxidase function in patients with chronic granulomatous disease. J Pediatr 1996; 128:104-7. 7. Koker MY, Sanal O, Leeuwen K, et al. Four different NCF2 mutations in six families from Turkey and overview of NCF2 gene mutations. Eur J Clin Invest 2009; 39(10):942-51. 8. Köker MY. Kronik granulomatoz hastalık ve alt gruplarının tanısında DHR 123 testi ve anti-NADPH oksidaz komponent antikorlarla akım sitometrik analizin yeri. 2006. Doktora tezi, Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara. 9. Çiçekkökü D, Öğülür Ö, Karakoç-Aydıner E et al. Oxidative Burst with Dihydrorhodamine Test: Reference Values in Healthy Controls. Turk J Immunol 2015; 3(2):49-53. 10. Bonilla FA, Bernstein IL, Khan DA et al. Practice parameter for the diagnosis and management of primary immunodeficiency. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2015; 136:1186-205. 11. Bousfiha A, Jeddane L, Picard C et al. The 2017 IUIS Phenotypic Classification for Primary Immunodeficiencies. J Clin Immunol 2018; 38(1):129-43. 12. Kulkarni M, Gupta M, Madkaikar M. Phenotypic Prenatal Diagnosis of Chronic Granulomatous Disease: A Useful Tool in The Absence Of Molecular Diagnosis. Scand J Immunol 2017; 86(6):486-490. 13. Koker MY, Camcıoglu Y, Leeuwen K, et al. Clinical, functional, and genetic characterization of chronic granulomatous diseases in 89 Turkish patients. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2013; 132:1156-63.
There are 1 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects Health Care Administration
Journal Section Congress Proceedings
Authors

Hülya Uçaryılmaz This is me

Hasibe Artaç

Publication Date December 10, 2019
Acceptance Date January 16, 2020
Published in Issue Year 2019 Volume: 7 Issue: Ek - IRUPEC 2019 Kongresi Tam Metin Bildirileri

Cite

Vancouver Uçaryılmaz H, Artaç H. Determination of Reference Intervals For Dihydrorhodamine 123 (DHR) Assay in Healthy Children. pediatr pract res. 2019;7(Ek):611-6.