Performance of the preanalytical check module of the Stago <scp>STA</scp> R Max2 mechanical endpoint detection analyzer for assessing the impact of hemolysis, lipemia, and icterus on <scp>aPTT</scp> and PT

Florin, Lisa; Oyaert, Matthijs; Maerken, Tom Van; Devreese, Katrien

doi:10.1111/ijlh.12871

Cited by 9 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The potential interference of hemolysis on PT and APTT assays has been the subject of several studies. 7,[13][14][15][16][17]27,28 However, different combination of reagents and instrumentations makes the comparison between these studies cumbersome. 1 Stago STA R instruments have a viscoelastic mechanical clot detection.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…1 Stago STA R instruments have a viscoelastic mechanical clot detection. 7,14,17,18 Besides that, the content in the reagent kits varies among the manufacturers and many of the manufacturers offer more than one assay for the same analysis, for example, Stago offers four different assays for PT.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One point to consider is the mode for clot detection. Several studies have used ACL TOP instruments from ILS or Sysmex or Dade Behring BCS instruments that utilize photo‐optical detection, whereas the Stago STA R instruments have a viscoelastic mechanical clot detection . Besides that, the content in the reagent kits varies among the manufacturers and many of the manufacturers offer more than one assay for the same analysis, for example, Stago offers four different assays for PT.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For APTT, several studies with photo‐optical clot detection have concluded that hemolysis does affect the measurements . Among the studies of APTT with mechanical clot detection, a significant shortening, small insignificant shortening, and a prolongation of clotting times as well as no significant difference have been reported. In the present study with mechanical clot detection, a small but clinically irrelevant shortening of APTT was observed.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous studies on hemolysis interference in coagulation assays have primarily dealt with the assays for prothrombin time (PT), activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT), fibrinogen, and fibrin D‐dimer (D‐dimer), while there is only a limited amount of studies performed on the assays for antithrombin, low‐molecular‐weight heparin (LMWH), protein C (PC), protein S (PS), and factor VIII (FVIII) . However, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, no previous hemolysis studies have been carried out on the assay for von Willebrand factor antigen (vWF).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Hemolysis interference in 10 coagulation assays on an instrument with viscosity‐based, chromogenic, and turbidimetric clot detection

Hedeland

Gustafsson

Touza

et al. 2020

Int J Lab Hematology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Hemolysate in plasma samples from patients may cause misleading results in coagulation assays. Even though modern coagulation instruments often are equipped with modules that can detect hemolysis, icterus, and lipemia (HIL), studies that report the influence of these interferences are still limited. The present paper focuses on the influence of hemolysis on 10 coagulation assays.Methods: Artificial hemolysis was created by freezing/thawing, and the hemolysates generated were added to pools of patient plasma. Pathological and normal levels were pooled separately. These spiked samples were analyzed on a STA R Max 2 instrument. The coagulation assays evaluated utilize clot, chromogenic, or immunoturbidimetric detection. Results:Four of the evaluated assays were not influenced by hemolysis: fibrinogen, von Willebrand factor antigen, activated partial thromboplastin time, and factor VIII.Interestingly, normal and slightly elevated prothrombin time (INR < 2.0) was insensitive to hemolysis, whereas samples with a high INR (≥2.0) exhibited falsely high readings. The assays for antithrombin and fibrin D-dimer displayed an intermediate sensitivity to hemolysis. The most sensitive assay turned out to be anti-Xa, followed by protein C and protein S. For the anti-Xa assay, the results are decreased by 10% already at 0.5 g/L hemoglobin. Conclusion:The present study shows that hemolysis affects several of commonly used coagulation assays. Since the sensitivity for hemolysis is dependent on the brand of the assay as well as the instrument and principle of measurement, it is necessary to evaluate the influence of each specific combination. K E Y W O R D Scoagulation, freezing, hemoglobin interference, hemolysis, pre-analytical error, serum indices

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Hemolysis interference in 10 coagulation assays on an instrument with viscosity‐based, chromogenic, and turbidimetric clot detection

Hedeland

Gustafsson

Touza

et al. 2020

Int J Lab Hematology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Hematology and coagulation preanalytics for clinical chemists: Factors intrinsic to the sample and extrinsic to the patient

Winter

Pittman

Harris

2023

Clinical Biochemistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hemostasis Testing in the Emergency Department: A Narrative Review

Thonon,

Van Nieuwenhove,

Thachil

et al. 2024

Semin Thromb Hemost

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Routine laboratory screening is typically performed at initial evaluation of the vast majority of presentations to the emergency department (ED). These laboratory results are crucial to the diagnostic process, as they may influence up to 70% of clinical decisions. However, despite the usefulness of biological assessments, many tests performed are inappropriate or of doubtful clinical relevance. This overutilization rate of laboratory testing in hospitals, which represents a significant medical–economic burden, ranges from 20 to 67%, with coagulation tests at the top of the list. While reviews frequently focus on nonintensive care units, there are few published assessments of emergency-specific interventions or guidelines/guidance to date. The aim of this review is to highlight current recommendations for hemostasis evaluation in the emergency setting with a specific analysis of common situations leading to ED admissions, such as suspected venous thrombosis or severe bleeding. We revisit the evidence related to the assessment of patient's hemostatic capacity based on comprehensive history taking and physical examination as well as best practice recommendations for blood sample collection to ensure the reliability of results. This review also includes an examination of various currently available point of care tests and a comprehensive discussion on indications, limitations, and interpretation of these tests.

show abstract

Performance of the preanalytical check module of the Stago STA R Max2 mechanical endpoint detection analyzer for assessing the impact of hemolysis, lipemia, and icterus on aPTT and PT

Cited by 9 publications

References 5 publications

Hemolysis interference in 10 coagulation assays on an instrument with viscosity‐based, chromogenic, and turbidimetric clot detection

Hemolysis interference in 10 coagulation assays on an instrument with viscosity‐based, chromogenic, and turbidimetric clot detection

Hematology and coagulation preanalytics for clinical chemists: Factors intrinsic to the sample and extrinsic to the patient

Hemostasis Testing in the Emergency Department: A Narrative Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About