Nelson Courtney, Constable Peter D, Connolly Sara L
Department of Pathobiology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA.
Department of Veterinary Clinical Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL, USA.
Vet Clin Pathol. 2021 Sep;50(3):327-341. doi: 10.1111/vcp.13010. Epub 2021 Sep 20.
Blood gas chemistry analyzers typically produce results faster and use smaller sample volumes than reference chemistry analyzers. However, results may not be comparable between blood gas chemistry analyzers and reference chemistry analyzers or between different models of blood gas chemistry analyzers. This could suggest the use of separate reference intervals and, thus, has implications when making clinical decisions.
We aimed to perform method comparison studies to evaluate selected canine serum biochemical values obtained using the Nova Stat Profile Prime Plus VET (Prime Plus VET), Stat Profile Nova pHOx Ultra (Ultra), and Beckman Coulter AU680 (Beckman) analyzers. We hypothesized that the three analyzers would be identical within inherent imprecision.
Jugular venous blood samples were collected from 103 endurance-trained sled dogs, and serum was harvested and stored for analysis. Results for serum chloride, potassium, sodium, creatinine, and urea nitrogen concentrations obtained from the Prime Plus VET and Ultra analyzers were compared with results from the Beckman analyzer, which was considered to be a reference method. Results for serum chloride, potassium, sodium, creatinine, urea nitrogen, and L-lactate concentrations obtained from the Prime Plus VET and Ultra analyzers were compared. Passing-Bablok regression and Bland-Altman plots were used for method comparison.
Significant (P < 0.05) constant or proportional bias was found for many analytes for all three method comparison studies.
Due to the presence of statistically significant differences between all three analyzers that may be clinically relevant, it is recommended that reference intervals be created for new blood gas analyzers, even when similar methodologies are used.
与传统化学分析仪相比，血气化学分析仪通常能更快得出结果，且使用的样本量更小。然而，血气化学分析仪与传统化学分析仪之间或不同型号的血气化学分析仪之间的结果可能无法直接比较。这可能意味着需要使用单独的参考区间，因此在做出临床决策时会产生影响。
我们旨在进行方法比较研究，以评估使用诺瓦Stat Profile Prime Plus VET（Prime Plus VET）、Stat Profile Nova pHOx Ultra（Ultra）和贝克曼库尔特AU680（贝克曼）分析仪获得的选定犬血清生化值。我们假设这三种分析仪在固有不精密度范围内是相同的。
从103只耐力训练的雪橇犬采集颈静脉血样本，收获血清并储存用于分析。将Prime Plus VET和Ultra分析仪获得的血清氯、钾、钠、肌酐和尿素氮浓度结果与被视为参考方法的贝克曼分析仪的结果进行比较。比较Prime Plus VET和Ultra分析仪获得的血清氯、钾、钠、肌酐、尿素氮和L-乳酸浓度结果。采用Passing-Bablok回归和Bland-Altman图进行方法比较。
在所有三项方法比较研究中，许多分析物均发现有显著（P < 0.05）的恒定或比例偏差。
由于所有三种分析仪之间存在可能具有临床相关性的统计学显著差异，因此建议即使使用相似的方法，也应为新的血气分析仪建立参考区间。
