Several methods have been developed to detect common prothrombotic mutations, including factor V Leiden (G1691), prothrombin G20210A, and methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) C677C. In this study, we compared the accuracy of three different molecular techniques, i.e.: (1) restriction enzyme digestion (RFLP), (2) real time with hybridization probes and final melting curve (Fluorescence Resonance Energy Transfer, FRET), and (3) real time with hydrolysis probes (TaqMan(®)). Sequencing was used as the reference standard. Our data showed that RFLPs analysis for the detection of prothrombotic mutations, albeit easy-to-perform, had a limited reliability for assessing correct genotypes. FRET analysis displayed higher resolution than RFLPs. Additionally, FRET analysis was faster and less tedious than sequencing.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10238-010-0096-3DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

prothrombotic mutations
8
real time
8
fret analysis
8
comparison three
4
three methods
4
methods genotyping
4
genotyping prothrombotic
4
prothrombotic polymorphisms
4
polymorphisms methods
4
methods developed
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!