English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Due to the presence of inhibitory and possible mimicking substances in plasma difficulties have occurred in the use of the Limulus amoebocyte lysate test. Currently, there are a variety of extraction techniques discussed in the literature which are used to remove these interfering substances, but there is little information comparing these techniques. Five such procedures were compared in their ability to provide an extracted plasma sample in which low levels of endotoxin could be detected by the Limulus amoebocyte lysate test. Results indicated that some procedures adversely affected endotoxin detection. The dilution + heating extraction method was found to be as effective as the widely used chloroform extraction method. Comparison of Limulus amoebocyte lysate test results from healthy human plasma samples extracted by these two methods indicated that lysate type and not extraction procedure was associated with previously reported questionable positive tests. Thus, ambiguities associated with Limulus amoebocyte lysate tests of plasma samples may be due not only to extraction method but also the lysate type employed.

Comparison of plasma extraction techniques in preparation of samples for endotoxin testing by the Limulus amoebocyte lysate test