Comparison of a two-step Tempus600 hub solution single-tube vs. container-based, one-step pneumatic transport system

Abstract

Abstract Objectives Efficient and timely transportation of clinical samples is pivotal to ensure accurate diagnoses and effective patient care. During the transportation process, preservation of sample integrity is crucial to avoid pre-analytical aberrations on laboratory results. Here, we present a comparative analysis between a two-step Tempus600 hub solution single-tube and a one-step, container-based pneumatic transport system (PTS) from Airco, for the in-house transportation of blood samples. Methods Ten blood samples from healthy volunteers were split in 10 mL collection tubes filled at full or half capacity for transportation with the two PTS (about 250 m). To compare the impact of transportation, markers of hemolysis such as lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), potassium (K+), and the hemolysis index (HI), were determined. Additionally, differences in HI in routine samples and repeated transportation was investigated. To assess and compare the mechanistic impact profiles, we recorded the acceleration profiles of the two PTS using a shock data logger. Results Transportation using the Tempus600 hub solution resulted in 49 and 46 % higher HI with samples filled to total or half capacity, respectively. Routine samples transported with the Tempus600 hub solution showed a higher median HI by 23 and 33 %. Additionally, shock logger analysis showed an elevated amount of shocks (6.5 fold) and shock intensities (1.8 fold). Conclusions The Tempus600 hub solution caused an increased number of unreportable LDH or K+ results based on the hemolysis index. However, it was only statistically significant for LDH (p<0.01 and p<0.08) – while the comparisons for K+ were not statistically significant (p<0.28 and p<0.56).