Two different hematocrit detection methods: different methods, different results?
Two different hematocrit detection methods: different methods, different results?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/1756-0500-3-65
复制
发表时间：
2010-03-09
影响因子：
1.8
通讯作者：
Béchir M
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Bosshart M;Stover JF;Stocker R;Asmis LM;Feige J;Neff TA;Schuepbach RA;Cottini SR;Béchir M
关于红细胞压积检测方法对输血触发因素的影响知之甚少。因此，本研究的目的是比较两种不同的红细胞压积评估方法。在总计50例危重患者中，使用（1）血气分析仪（ABLflex 800）和（2）中心实验室方法（ADVIA® 2120）分析红细胞压积并进行比较。重复测量的Bland-Altman分析显示相关性良好，偏倚为+1.39%，2 SD为± 3.12%。24%血细胞比容组的相关性为r2 = 0.87。Kappa值为0.56时，22.7%的病例会采用不同的输血方式。在-28%-红细胞压积组中，相关性相似（r2 = 0.8），kappa值为0.58，21%的病例输血方式不同。尽管在临床常规中用于测定红细胞压积的两种方法之间具有良好的一致性，但根据所采用的方法，计算出的1.4%的差异可能会对输血触发因素产生重大影响。
Less is known about the influence of hematocrit detection methodology on transfusion triggers. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to compare two different hematocrit-assessing methods. In a total of 50 critically ill patients hematocrit was analyzed using (1) blood gas analyzer (ABLflex 800) and (2) the central laboratory method (ADVIA® 2120) and compared. Bland-Altman analysis for repeated measurements showed a good correlation with a bias of +1.39% and 2 SD of ± 3.12%. The 24%-hematocrit-group showed a correlation of r2 = 0.87. With a kappa of 0.56, 22.7% of the cases would have been transfused differently. In the-28%-hematocrit group with a similar correlation (r2 = 0.8) and a kappa of 0.58, 21% of the cases would have been transfused differently. Despite a good agreement between the two methods used to determine hematocrit in clinical routine, the calculated difference of 1.4% might substantially influence transfusion triggers depending on the employed method.