Patel Kirti P, Hay Gary W, Cheteri Mahesh Keitheri, Holt David W
Memorial Hermann Baptist Hospital, Beaumont, Texas, USA.
J Extra Corpor Technol. 2007 Mar;39(1):10-7.
The purpose of this study was to compare the variation in hemoglobin (Hgb) values among various point-of-care (POC) analyzers available on the market. Eight analyzers (Gem 3000, ABL 720, ABL 77, Rapidpoint 405, IL 682, GemOPL, Hb 201+, and manual/centrifugation) were compared with the Hgb values from the Beckman Coulter LH750. A total of 72 patient samples were analyzed on each test instrument. The samples were obtained after intubation, after heparinization, during cardiopulmonary bypass, and after protamine administration. Four of the samples were excluded from the study because of delayed sample analysis. The calculated mean differences of reference test method Hgb (mean +/- SD) for all samples (n = 68) were Gem 3000 = 1.431 +/- 0.396 g/dL; ABL 720 = -0.224 +/- 0.240 g/dL; ABL 77 = 0.341 +/- 0.578 g/dL; Rapidpoint 405 = 0.001 +/- 0.205 g/dL; IL 682 = -0.137 +/- 0.232 g/dL; GemOPL = 0.774 +/- 0.427 g/dL; Hb 201+ = 0.110 +/- 0.524 g/dL; and manual/ centrifugation = 0.547 +/- 0.499 g/dL. Cumulative results indicated that the bias in Hgb values from the Gem 3000, ABL720, ABL 77, IL 682, GemOPL, and the manual method were statistically significant (p < .05), compared with the Coulter LH750. Additionally, only the Rapidpoint 405 and Hb 201+ most closely matched the values from the Coulter LH750 (p > .05). Some of the methodologies have previously been shown to be affected during hemodilution, hypoproteinemia, and/or after blood transfusion. There is variability among methodologies, which can give rise to statistically different Hgb values, and one should consider the "ideal" instrument based on this and many other factors. Based on our results, the rank order of closest approximation to the Coulter LH750 measurement was Rapidpoint 405, Hb 201+, IL 682, ABL 720, ABL 77, manual/centrifugation, GemOPL, and Gem 3000.
本研究的目的是比较市场上各种即时检验（POC）分析仪所测血红蛋白（Hgb）值的差异。将八台分析仪（Gem 3000、ABL 720、ABL 77、Rapidpoint 405、IL 682、GemOPL、Hb 201+以及手工/离心法）与贝克曼库尔特LH750所测的Hgb值进行比较。在每台检测仪器上共分析了72份患者样本。样本在插管后、肝素化后、体外循环期间以及鱼精蛋白给药后采集。由于样本分析延迟，有4份样本被排除在研究之外。所有样本（n = 68）的参考检测方法Hgb的计算平均差值（均值±标准差）为：Gem 3000 = 1.431±0.396 g/dL；ABL 720 = -0.224±0.240 g/dL；ABL 77 = 0.341±0.578 g/dL；Rapidpoint 405 = 0.001±0.205 g/dL；IL 682 = -0.137±0.232 g/dL；GemOPL = 0.774±0.427 g/dL；Hb 201+ = 0.110±0.524 g/dL；手工/离心法 = 0.547±0.499 g/dL。累积结果表明，与库尔特LH750相比，Gem 3000、ABL720、ABL 77、IL 682、GemOPL以及手工法所测Hgb值的偏差具有统计学意义（p <.05）。此外，只有Rapidpoint 405和Hb 201+与库尔特LH750的值最接近匹配（p >.05）。此前已证明某些方法在血液稀释、低蛋白血症和/或输血后会受到影响。不同方法之间存在差异，这可能导致Hgb值在统计学上有所不同，人们应基于此以及许多其他因素来考虑“理想”的仪器。根据我们的结果，与库尔特LH750测量值最接近的顺序依次为：Rapidpoint 405、Hb 201+、IL 682、ABL 720、ABL 77、手工/离心法、GemOPL和Gem 3000。
