Is Vision C interchangeable with the modified Westergren method for the erythrocyte sedimentation rate?
Author:
Erdogan Serpil1ORCID, Firat Ridvan1, Avcioglu Gamze2, Yilmaz Gulsen2, Erel Ozcan2, Yilmaz Fatma Meric2
Affiliation:
1. Ministry of Health Ankara City Hospital , Ankara , Turkey 2. Department of Medical Biochemistry , Yıldırım Beyazıt University , Ankara , Turkey
Abstract
Abstract
Objectives
As one of the most widely used tests, the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) is a measurement of sedimentation reaction in blood samples. Although the recommended method for ESR measurement is the Westergren method, this method has some disadvantages in comparison with automated ESR systems. In this cross-sectional study, we aimed to compare Vision c with the Westergren method.
Methods
The Vision c automated ESR system and the modified Westergren method were compared using K3EDTA-containing tubes and citrated blood tubes from randomly selected 100 patients. Precision, bias, and interference calculations were performed.
Results
The mean difference between the Vision c (room temperature) and the modified Westergren method was 22.8 ± 26.6 mm/h (95% CI for the mean was 17.50–28.08 mm/h). The mean difference between the Vision c (18 °C) and the modified Westergren method was 27.4 ± 30.6 mm/h (95% CI for the mean was 21.3–33.5 mm/h). The calculated regression analysis equation was “y= 0.263 + 1.053x” and “y= −0.530 + 0.851x” for the Vision c (room temperature) and the Vision c (18 °C), respectively. The imprecision values ranged at 7.55–17.09%. According to our external quality control results, bias was 11.11 and 9.66 for the low- and high-level samples, respectively.
Conclusions
The Vision c automated ESR system has a comparable analytical performance with the modified Westergren method. The Vision c automated system may be utilized in ESR measurements with quality control evaluations. Nevertheless, temperature correction using Manley’s monogram causes an important negative bias and should be taken into consideration during the evaluation of the Vision c results.
Publisher
Walter de Gruyter GmbH
Subject
Biochemistry (medical),Clinical Biochemistry,Molecular Biology,Biochemistry
Reference22 articles.
1. Piva, E, Sanzari, MC, Servidio, G, Plebani, M. Length of sedimentation reaction in undiluted blood (erythrocyte sedimentation rate): variations with sex and age and reference limits. Clin Chem Lab Med 2001;39:451–4. https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm.2001.071. 2. Stuart, J. Guidelines on selection of laboratory tests for monitoring the acute phase response. J Clin Pathol 1988;41:1203–12. https://doi.org/10.1136/jcp.41.11.1203. 3. Curvers, J, Kooren, J, Laan, M, van Lierop, E, van de Kerkhof, D, Scharnhorst, V, et al.. Evaluation of the Ves-Matic Cube 200 erythrocyte sedimentation method: comparison with Westergren-based methods. Am J Clin Pathol 2010;134:653–60. https://doi.org/10.1309/ajcpmeww62bgqhjh. 4. Hopstaken, RM, Muris, JW, Knottnerus, JA, Kester, AD, Rinkens, PE, Dinant, GJ. Contributions of symptoms, signs, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, and C-reactive protein to a diagnosis of pneumonia in acute lower respiratory tract infection. Br J Gen Pract: J Roy Coll Gen Pract 2003;53:358–64. 5. Paakkonen, M, Kallio, MJ, Kallio, PE, Peltola, H. Sensitivity of erythrocyte sedimentation rate and C-reactive protein in childhood bone and joint infections. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2010;468:861–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-009-0936-1.
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|