Shin So Youn, Kwon Kye Chul, Koo Sun Hoe, Park Jong Woo, Ko Chi Seon, Song Jeong Hoon, Sung Ji Youn
Department of Laboratory Medicine, College of Medicine, Chungnam National University, Daejeon, Korea.
Korean J Lab Med. 2008 Jun;28(3):214-20. doi: 10.3343/kjlm.2008.28.3.214.
Despite the advances in total laboratory automation, a considerable amount of work in blood banks is still done using outdated manual methods. Some automated pre-transfusion testing instruments have recently been developed. Of these, we evaluated and compared the AutoVue Innova (Ortho, USA) and the Techno TwinStation (DiaMed AG, Switzerland).
Forward and reverse ABO/Rh typing and unexpected antibody screening and identification tests were performed on 4,628 samples using the manual method and the two automated instruments. Two different anticoagulants (EDTA and citrate) were compared in ABO/Rh typing and unexpected antibody screening tests. Titrating studies were conducted on the following 7 dilutions using 5 samples of irregular antibodies with anti-E, anti-E & -c, anti-D, and anti-Le(a) with anti-Fy(a): 1:2, 1:4, 1:8, 1:16, 1:32, 1:64, and 1:128. The test throughput per hour, the time required to perform 1 and 100 tests, and a simulation test for total events occurring in 1 day were also measured.
No erroneous results were reported between the two instruments and the manual method. Discrepancies observed in 10 cases (0.4%) of ABO/Rh typing were of higher intensity with AutoVue Innova than with the manual method. AutoVue Innova exhibited the highest sensitivity in the titrating study and throughput performance compared with the manual method and the Techno TwinStation. Especially in the throughput and time required to complete 100 antibody screening tests, AutoVue Innova had a 3.3- and 3.5-fold higher performance, respectively, than Techno TwinStation.
Because both of the two fully automated instruments (AutoVue Innova and Techno TwinStation) had high levels of accuracy and performance, it is expected that use of fully automated instruments will reduce human labor, turnaround time, and operator error in the blood bank.
尽管实验室全面自动化取得了进展，但血库中仍有相当一部分工作采用过时的手工方法完成。最近开发了一些自动化输血前检测仪器。在此，我们对AutoVue Innova（美国奥瑟诊断公司）和Techno TwinStation（瑞士DiaMed公司）进行了评估和比较。
使用手工方法以及这两种自动化仪器，对4628份样本进行ABO/Rh血型正反定型、意外抗体筛查和鉴定试验。在ABO/Rh血型鉴定和意外抗体筛查试验中，比较了两种不同的抗凝剂（乙二胺四乙酸和枸橼酸盐）。使用5份含有抗-E、抗-E和抗-c、抗-D以及抗-Le(a)和抗-Fy(a)的不规则抗体样本，对以下7种稀释度进行滴定研究：1:2、1:4、1:8、1:16、1:32、1:64和1:128。还测量了每小时的检测通量、进行1次和100次检测所需的时间，以及1天内发生的全部事件的模拟测试。
两种仪器与手工方法之间均未报告错误结果。在10例（0.4%）ABO/Rh血型鉴定中观察到的差异，与手工方法相比，AutoVue Innova的强度更高。与手工方法和Techno TwinStation相比，AutoVue Innova在滴定研究和通量性能方面表现出最高的灵敏度。特别是在完成100次抗体筛查试验的通量和所需时间方面，AutoVue Innova分别比Techno TwinStation高出3.3倍和3.5倍。
由于这两种全自动仪器（AutoVue Innova和Techno TwinStation）均具有较高的准确性和性能，预计在血库中使用全自动仪器将减少人力、周转时间和操作人员误差。
