急诊临床决策中现场动脉血气分析仪检测钠、钾与中心实验室分析仪检测静脉血清的比较

Valiyaveetil Anjana, K. T. Madavan
{"title":"急诊临床决策中现场动脉血气分析仪检测钠、钾与中心实验室分析仪检测静脉血清的比较","authors":"Valiyaveetil Anjana, K. T. Madavan","doi":"10.7860/njlm/2022/53252.2646","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: The Emergency Departments (ED) are equipped with Point-of-Care (POC) blood gas analysers (BGA) which deliver fast results on multiple parameters of arterial/venous blood. There is no consensus among ED physicians on the reliability of electrolyte results by POC Arterial Blood Gas (ABG) analysis compared to venous serum electrolyte from Central Laboratory Analyser/Auto-Analyser (CLA/AA). Aim: To compare the electrolyte(sodium and potassium) by POC arterial BGA (ABL800 Flex Radiometer) with venous electrolyte by CLA (Beckman Coulter AU 5800). Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional study was performed in the ED and Central Laboratory of the tertiary hospital from 1st July 2018 to 31st July 2019. A total of 254 critically ill adult patients with various etiologies, were enrolled in the study. The arterial and venous blood samples were collected for electrolyte measurement within a span of 15 minutes. The ABG samples, anticoagulated with liquid heparin, were processed in POC BGA. The venous samples collected in plain tubes were analysed in CLA. The results of sodium and potassium were compared by the mean, correlation coefficient, p-value, and Bland Altman Plots {95% Limit of agreement (LOA)}. Results: Out of 254 paired samples (mean age: 63±15 years), 157 (61.8%) were males and 97 (38.2%) females. The mean sodium values were 131.9±7.7 mmol/L in ABG and 132.3±7.1 mmol/L in CLA (p-value <0.0001). The mean difference was 0.4 mmol/L. The mean potassium values were 3.9±1.0 mmol/L (ABG) and 4.2±0.9 mmol/L (CLA), {p-value<0.0001}. The mean difference was 0.3 mmol/L. These differences were within the accepted range specified by the United States Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments. There were statistically significant strong positive correlations between the measurements of the two instruments r=0.78 for sodium and r=0.76 for potassium. The 95% LOA for sodium and potassium on both the instruments were -10.03 to 9.09 mmol/L and -1.49 to 0.97 mmol/L respectively, both wide and unacceptable. Conclusion: The arterial sodium and potassium measurements by BGA were not reliable in decision making in ED when compared to the venous serum by CLA as the 95% LOA was wide and unacceptable. Hence, sodium and potassium values by BGA alone might not be used as criteria for management without confirmation from venous serum values by CLA.","PeriodicalId":31115,"journal":{"name":"National Journal of Laboratory Medicine","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Sodium and Potassium by Point-of-Care Arterial Blood Gas Analyzer and Venous Serum by Central Laboratory Analyser in Emergency Clinical Decision Making\",\"authors\":\"Valiyaveetil Anjana, K. T. Madavan\",\"doi\":\"10.7860/njlm/2022/53252.2646\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction: The Emergency Departments (ED) are equipped with Point-of-Care (POC) blood gas analysers (BGA) which deliver fast results on multiple parameters of arterial/venous blood. There is no consensus among ED physicians on the reliability of electrolyte results by POC Arterial Blood Gas (ABG) analysis compared to venous serum electrolyte from Central Laboratory Analyser/Auto-Analyser (CLA/AA). Aim: To compare the electrolyte(sodium and potassium) by POC arterial BGA (ABL800 Flex Radiometer) with venous electrolyte by CLA (Beckman Coulter AU 5800). Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional study was performed in the ED and Central Laboratory of the tertiary hospital from 1st July 2018 to 31st July 2019. A total of 254 critically ill adult patients with various etiologies, were enrolled in the study. The arterial and venous blood samples were collected for electrolyte measurement within a span of 15 minutes. The ABG samples, anticoagulated with liquid heparin, were processed in POC BGA. The venous samples collected in plain tubes were analysed in CLA. The results of sodium and potassium were compared by the mean, correlation coefficient, p-value, and Bland Altman Plots {95% Limit of agreement (LOA)}. Results: Out of 254 paired samples (mean age: 63±15 years), 157 (61.8%) were males and 97 (38.2%) females. The mean sodium values were 131.9±7.7 mmol/L in ABG and 132.3±7.1 mmol/L in CLA (p-value <0.0001). The mean difference was 0.4 mmol/L. The mean potassium values were 3.9±1.0 mmol/L (ABG) and 4.2±0.9 mmol/L (CLA), {p-value<0.0001}. The mean difference was 0.3 mmol/L. These differences were within the accepted range specified by the United States Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments. There were statistically significant strong positive correlations between the measurements of the two instruments r=0.78 for sodium and r=0.76 for potassium. The 95% LOA for sodium and potassium on both the instruments were -10.03 to 9.09 mmol/L and -1.49 to 0.97 mmol/L respectively, both wide and unacceptable. Conclusion: The arterial sodium and potassium measurements by BGA were not reliable in decision making in ED when compared to the venous serum by CLA as the 95% LOA was wide and unacceptable. Hence, sodium and potassium values by BGA alone might not be used as criteria for management without confirmation from venous serum values by CLA.\",\"PeriodicalId\":31115,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"National Journal of Laboratory Medicine\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"National Journal of Laboratory Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7860/njlm/2022/53252.2646\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"National Journal of Laboratory Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7860/njlm/2022/53252.2646","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:急诊科(ED)配备了即时护理(POC)血气分析仪(BGA),可快速提供动脉/静脉血的多个参数结果。与中央实验室分析仪/自动分析仪(CLA/AA)的静脉血清电解质相比,POC动脉血气(ABG)分析电解质结果的可靠性在急诊科医生中没有达成共识。目的:比较POC动脉BGA (ABL800 Flex辐射计)和CLA (Beckman Coulter AU 5800)测定的静脉电解质(钠、钾)。材料与方法:本横断面研究于2018年7月1日至2019年7月31日在三级医院急诊科和中心实验室进行。共有254名不同病因的危重成人患者参加了这项研究。15分钟内取动、静脉血测定电解质。用液体肝素抗凝的ABG样品在POC BGA中处理。用CLA法分析平管采集的静脉标本。采用均数、相关系数、p值和Bland Altman图{95%一致限(LOA)}比较钠和钾的结果。结果:254例配对样本(平均年龄63±15岁)中,男性157例(61.8%),女性97例(38.2%)。ABG和CLA的平均钠值分别为131.9±7.7 mmol/L和132.3±7.1 mmol/L (p值<0.0001)。平均差异为0.4 mmol/L。平均钾值分别为3.9±1.0 mmol/L (ABG)和4.2±0.9 mmol/L (CLA), p值<0.0001}。平均差异为0.3 mmol/L。这些差异在美国临床实验室改进修正案规定的可接受范围内。两种仪器的测量值之间存在统计学上显著的强正相关,钠的测量值r=0.78,钾的测量值r=0.76。两种仪器对钠和钾的95% LOA分别为-10.03 ~ 9.09 mmol/L和-1.49 ~ 0.97 mmol/L,范围较广且不可接受。结论:与CLA相比,BGA测定的动脉钠、钾在ED诊断中不可靠,95% LOA过大且不可接受。因此,如果没有CLA的静脉血清值的确认,仅BGA的钠和钾值可能不能作为治疗的标准。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of Sodium and Potassium by Point-of-Care Arterial Blood Gas Analyzer and Venous Serum by Central Laboratory Analyser in Emergency Clinical Decision Making
Introduction: The Emergency Departments (ED) are equipped with Point-of-Care (POC) blood gas analysers (BGA) which deliver fast results on multiple parameters of arterial/venous blood. There is no consensus among ED physicians on the reliability of electrolyte results by POC Arterial Blood Gas (ABG) analysis compared to venous serum electrolyte from Central Laboratory Analyser/Auto-Analyser (CLA/AA). Aim: To compare the electrolyte(sodium and potassium) by POC arterial BGA (ABL800 Flex Radiometer) with venous electrolyte by CLA (Beckman Coulter AU 5800). Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional study was performed in the ED and Central Laboratory of the tertiary hospital from 1st July 2018 to 31st July 2019. A total of 254 critically ill adult patients with various etiologies, were enrolled in the study. The arterial and venous blood samples were collected for electrolyte measurement within a span of 15 minutes. The ABG samples, anticoagulated with liquid heparin, were processed in POC BGA. The venous samples collected in plain tubes were analysed in CLA. The results of sodium and potassium were compared by the mean, correlation coefficient, p-value, and Bland Altman Plots {95% Limit of agreement (LOA)}. Results: Out of 254 paired samples (mean age: 63±15 years), 157 (61.8%) were males and 97 (38.2%) females. The mean sodium values were 131.9±7.7 mmol/L in ABG and 132.3±7.1 mmol/L in CLA (p-value <0.0001). The mean difference was 0.4 mmol/L. The mean potassium values were 3.9±1.0 mmol/L (ABG) and 4.2±0.9 mmol/L (CLA), {p-value<0.0001}. The mean difference was 0.3 mmol/L. These differences were within the accepted range specified by the United States Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments. There were statistically significant strong positive correlations between the measurements of the two instruments r=0.78 for sodium and r=0.76 for potassium. The 95% LOA for sodium and potassium on both the instruments were -10.03 to 9.09 mmol/L and -1.49 to 0.97 mmol/L respectively, both wide and unacceptable. Conclusion: The arterial sodium and potassium measurements by BGA were not reliable in decision making in ED when compared to the venous serum by CLA as the 95% LOA was wide and unacceptable. Hence, sodium and potassium values by BGA alone might not be used as criteria for management without confirmation from venous serum values by CLA.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
71
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信