Evaluation of Sensitive Analytes to Hemolysis Interference on an Automated Chemistry Analyzer.

IF 1.8 Q3 MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY Journal of Applied Laboratory Medicine Pub Date : 2024-05-02 DOI:10.1093/jalm/jfad124
Marfas Marakankadavu Parambu, Valerie Bush
{"title":"Evaluation of Sensitive Analytes to Hemolysis Interference on an Automated Chemistry Analyzer.","authors":"Marfas Marakankadavu Parambu, Valerie Bush","doi":"10.1093/jalm/jfad124","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Hemolysis is a common reason for specimen rejection in the laboratory. Our experience suggested that hemolysis (H) flag limits are too strict for some analytes leading to unnecessary specimen rejections. This study summarizes H flags for commonly rejected analytes on the Beckman Coulter DxC 700 AU analyzer.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We evaluated analytes with low-limit H flags and high rejection rates. These included: aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), iron (IRN), potassium (K), direct bilirubin (DBIL), magnesium (Mg), amylase (AMY), sodium (Na), gamma-glutamyltransferase (GGT), phosphorus (PHOS), albumin (ALB), alkaline phosphatase (ALKP), and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH). Five patient plasma pools without hemolysis were made from 50 patient specimens. Neat pools were analyzed to establish baseline analyte concentrations. A hemolysate was created by diluting whole blood with distilled water. Each analyte was tested after spiking each pool with the hemolysate to specific hemoglobin concentrations corresponding to manufacturer's H flags. Percent differences were calculated between baseline pool means and each flag's pool mean. Acceptance limits were based upon the average of the 2019 CLIA and the method precision limits. Calculated percent differences greater than the acceptance limits were considered significant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Manufacturer-defined hemolysis flags can be updated to greater than 1+ for Na, K, and AST, greater than 3+ for ALKP, and greater than 4+ for AMY and Mg. No changes were noted for the remaining analytes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The hemolysis criteria set for ALKP, AMY, AST, Mg, K, and Na were updated in the Remisol Advance middleware, which led to a 56% reduction in rejected hemolyzed specimens.</p>","PeriodicalId":46361,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Laboratory Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Laboratory Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jalm/jfad124","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Hemolysis is a common reason for specimen rejection in the laboratory. Our experience suggested that hemolysis (H) flag limits are too strict for some analytes leading to unnecessary specimen rejections. This study summarizes H flags for commonly rejected analytes on the Beckman Coulter DxC 700 AU analyzer.

Methods: We evaluated analytes with low-limit H flags and high rejection rates. These included: aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), iron (IRN), potassium (K), direct bilirubin (DBIL), magnesium (Mg), amylase (AMY), sodium (Na), gamma-glutamyltransferase (GGT), phosphorus (PHOS), albumin (ALB), alkaline phosphatase (ALKP), and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH). Five patient plasma pools without hemolysis were made from 50 patient specimens. Neat pools were analyzed to establish baseline analyte concentrations. A hemolysate was created by diluting whole blood with distilled water. Each analyte was tested after spiking each pool with the hemolysate to specific hemoglobin concentrations corresponding to manufacturer's H flags. Percent differences were calculated between baseline pool means and each flag's pool mean. Acceptance limits were based upon the average of the 2019 CLIA and the method precision limits. Calculated percent differences greater than the acceptance limits were considered significant.

Results: Manufacturer-defined hemolysis flags can be updated to greater than 1+ for Na, K, and AST, greater than 3+ for ALKP, and greater than 4+ for AMY and Mg. No changes were noted for the remaining analytes.

Conclusions: The hemolysis criteria set for ALKP, AMY, AST, Mg, K, and Na were updated in the Remisol Advance middleware, which led to a 56% reduction in rejected hemolyzed specimens.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
评估自动化学分析仪上对溶血干扰敏感的分析物。
背景:溶血是实验室标本拒收的常见原因。我们的经验表明,溶血(H)标志对某些分析物的限制过于严格,导致了不必要的标本拒收。本研究总结了贝克曼库尔特 DxC 700 AU 分析仪上常被拒收的分析物的 H 标志:方法:我们评估了具有低限 H 标志和高剔除率的分析物。这些分析物包括:天冬氨酸氨基转移酶(AST)、丙氨酸氨基转移酶(ALT)、铁(IRN)、钾(K)、直接胆红素(DBIL)、镁(Mg)、淀粉酶(AMY)、钠(Na)、γ-谷氨酰转移酶(GGT)、磷(PHOS)、白蛋白(ALB)、碱性磷酸酶(ALKP)和乳酸脱氢酶(LDH)。从 50 份患者标本中提取 5 份无溶血的患者血浆池。对无溶血的血浆池进行分析,以确定分析物的基线浓度。用蒸馏水稀释全血后产生溶血。在每个血池中加入溶血液,使其达到与制造商 H 标志相应的特定血红蛋白浓度后,对每种分析物进行检测。计算基线池平均值与每个标志池平均值之间的百分比差异。接受限基于 2019 CLIA 和方法精度限的平均值。大于接受限的计算差异百分比被视为显著差异:结果:制造商定义的溶血标志可更新为 Na、K 和 AST 大于 1+,ALKP 大于 3+,AMY 和 Mg 大于 4+。其余分析物没有变化:在 Remisol Advance 中间件中更新了 ALKP、AMY、AST、Mg、K 和 Na 的溶血标准设置,这使得被拒绝的溶血标本减少了 56%。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Applied Laboratory Medicine
Journal of Applied Laboratory Medicine MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY-
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
5.00%
发文量
137
期刊最新文献
SARS-CoV-2 Variants May Affect Saliva RT-PCR Assay Sensitivity. Quality Assurance for Multiplex Quantitative Clinical Chemistry Proteomics in Large Clinical Trials. Reference Values of Ceruloplasmin across the Adult Age Range in a Large Italian Healthy Population. Performance of Fentanyl Immunoassays in an ED Patient Population. A Pregnant Patient with a Positive Hepatitis C Antibody.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1