METHODS: The analytical determinations of BAC and CDT were performed following certified methods in HS-GC-FID and HPLC, respectively. For BAC, 0.50 g/L was used as cut-off, whereas 2.0% was used for CDT, according to the standardisation proposed by IFCC. A total of 929 drivers, tested for BAC at the time of hospital admission after a traffic accident, were classified into two groups: InjDr 1 (BAC ≤ 0.50 g/L) and InjDr 2 (BAC>0.50 g/L); all drivers were also tested for CDT.
RESULTS: InjDr 1 included 674 individuals, only 2.5% showing a CDT above the cutoff, whereas InjDr 2 group consisted of 255 subjects, 28.6% testing positive for CDT (Odds Ratio 15.5). When subdividing the InjDr group into increasing classes of CDT, a steady increase in the percentage of BAC-positive drivers was appreciated. Moreover, average BAC was found to parallel each class of CDT.
CONCLUSIONS: The reported data strongly support the use of CDT as a biomarker of increased risk of alcohol-related traffic accidents in the procedures of re-granting of the driving license upon confiscation for \"drink driving\".
方法:BAC和CDT的分析测定按照HS-GC-FID和HPLC中的认证方法进行,分别。对于BAC,0.50g/L用作截止值,而2.0%用于CDT,根据IFCC提出的标准化。共有929名司机,在交通事故后入院时进行BAC测试,分为两组:InjDr1(BAC≤0.50g/L)和InjDr2(BAC>0.50g/L);还测试了所有驾驶员的CDT。
结果:InjDr1包括674个人,只有2.5%的人显示CDT高于临界值,而InjDr2组由255名受试者组成,28.6%的CDT检测为阳性(赔率比15.5)。当将InjDr组细分为越来越多的CDT类时,BAC阳性驱动因素百分比的稳定增长受到赞赏。此外,发现平均BAC与各类CDT平行。
结论:报告的数据强烈支持在“酒后驾驶”被没收时重新颁发驾驶执照的程序中,使用CDT作为酒精相关交通事故风险增加的生物标志物。