Toggle Main Menu Toggle Search

Open Access padlockePrints

Are the enzymatic methods currently being used to measure bronchoalveolar lavage bile salt levels fit for purpose?

Lookup NU author(s): Dr Shruti Parikh, Dr Andrew Robertson, Dr Malcolm Brodlie, Emeritus Professor Paul Corris, Professor Christopher Ward, Professor Jeffrey Pearson

Downloads

Full text for this publication is not currently held within this repository. Alternative links are provided below where available.


Abstract

Background: Microaspiration after gastroesophageal reflux has been implicated in the chronic loss of allograft function in lung transplant patients. Bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) assessment for pepsin and bile salts is a common method to document reflux and aspiration. Clinically used methods for bile salt analysis include tandem mass spectrometry and diagnostic enzymatic kits designed to measure bile salts in serum. In clinical research, the enzymatic kits have been commonly used for BALF assays in lung transplant recipients, with reports of detection limits of 0.2 μmol/liter, and the levels used to inform clinical decisions. This study assessed the sensitivity of detection by 2 enzymatic assay kits compared with tandem mass spectrometry. Methods: These 2 kits were used to measure (1) the absorbance changes for 0 to 50 μmol/liter bile salts, (2) levels in gastric juice (10–10,010 μmol/liter), and (3) bile salt levels of 40 BALF samples that were also measured using tandem mass spectrometry (0.01–1.19 μmol/liter). Measurements of pH/impedance were done in 14 of 15 patients. Results: Neither kit had detection limits as low as claimed in previous BALF studies. The kits could be made more sensitive with a longer incubation time, (5 μmol/liter). All patients had detectable lavage bile acids using mass spectroscopy, 71% had pathologic distal gastroesophageal reflux, and 43% had pathologic proximal reflux. Conclusions: The enzymatic kits are not sensitive enough for use in situations where bile salt levels are much below 5 μmol/liter, which is the case in BALF. In addition, reports in the literature of levels significantly below 5 μmol/liter need reassessing. Tandem mass spectrometry with a lower limit of detection of 0.01 μmol/liter should be the method of choice.


Publication metadata

Author(s): Parikh S, Brownlee IA, Robertson AG, Manning NT, Johnson GE, Brodlie M, Corris PA, Ward C, Pearson JP

Publication type: Article

Publication status: Published

Journal: Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation

Year: 2013

Volume: 32

Issue: 4

Pages: 418-423

Print publication date: 04/02/2013

ISSN (print): 1053-2498

ISSN (electronic): 1557-3117

Publisher: Elsevier

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.healun.2012.12.008

DOI: 10.1016/j.healun.2012.12.008


Altmetrics

Altmetrics provided by Altmetric


Actions

Find at Newcastle University icon    Link to this publication


Share