Assessing serum hemoglobin levels without venipuncture: accuracy and reliability of Pronto-7 noninvasive spot-check device

Determining the validity of non-invasive spot-check hemoglobin co-oximetry testing to detect anemia in postpartum women at a tertiary care centre, a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Spot-check hemoglobin co-oximetry analyzers measure hemoglobin transcutaneously and offer the benefit of a hemoglobin measurement without phlebotomy. The objective of this study was to determine the validity of non-invasive spot-check hemoglobin co-oximetry testing for the detection of postpartum anemia (hemoglobin < 10 g/dL).

METHODS

Five hundred eighty-four women aged 18 and over were recruited on postpartum day one following a singleton delivery. Two non-invasive spot-check hemoglobin co-oximetry monitors, Masimo Pronto Pulse CO-Oximeter (Pronto) and Masimo Rad-67 Pulse CO-Oximeter (Rad-67), were evaluated and compared to the postpartum phlebotomy hemoglobin value.

RESULTS

Of 584 participants, 31% (181) had postpartum anemia by phlebotomy hemoglobin measurement. Bland-Altman plots determined a bias of + 2.4 (± 1.2) g/dL with the Pronto and + 2.2 (± 1.1) g/dL with the Rad-67. Low sensitivity was observed: 15% for the Pronto and 16% for the Rad-67. Adjusting for the fixed bias, the Pronto demonstrated a sensitivity of 68% and specificity of 84%, while the Rad-67 demonstrated a sensitivity of 78% and specificity of 88%.

CONCLUSION

A consistent overestimation of hemoglobin by the non-invasive spot-check hemoglobin co-oximetry monitors compared to phlebotomy hemoglobin result was observed. Even after adjusting for the fixed bias, the sensitivity for detecting postpartum anemia was low. Detection of postpartum anemia should not be based on these devices alone.

Hemoglobin Determination Using Pulse Co-Oximetry and Reduced-Volume Blood Gas Analysis in the Critically Ill: A Prospective Cohort Study

Hospital-acquired anemia is common in patients hospitalized in the intensive care unit (ICU). A major source of iatrogenic blood loss in the ICU is the withdrawal of blood for laboratory testing. The aim of our study was to analyze the feasibility and accuracy of non-invasive spot-check pulse co-oximetry (SpHb), and a reduced-volume blood gas analysis (ABG Hb) for the determination of Hb concentration in critically ill patients. Comparisons between Hb determined with test devices and the gold standard—complete blood count (CBC)—were performed using Bland−Altman analysis and concordance correlation coefficient (CCC). The limits of agreement between SpHb and CBC Hb were −2.0 [95%CI −2.3−(−1.7)] to 3.6 (95%CI 3.3−3.9) g/dL. The limits of agreement between ABG Hb and CBC Hb were −0.6 [95%CI −0.7−(−0.4)] to 2.0 (95%CI 1.9−2.2) g/dL. Spearman’s coefficient and CCC between ABG Hb and CBC Hb were 0.96 (95%CI 0.95−0.97, p < 0.001) and 0.91 (95%CI 0.88−0.92), respectively. Non-invasive spot-check Hb co-oximetry is not sufficiently accurate for the monitoring of hemoglobin concentration in critically ill patients. Reduced volume arterial blood gas analysis has acceptable accuracy and could replace complete blood count for the monitoring of Hb concentration in critically ill patients, leading to a significant reduction in blood volume lost for anemia diagnostics.

Emerging point-of-care technologies for anemia detection

Anemia, characterized by low blood hemoglobin level, affects about 25% of the world's population with the heaviest burden borne by women and children. Anemia leads to impaired cognitive development in children, as well as high morbidity and early mortality among sufferers. Anemia can be caused by nutritional deficiencies, oncologic treatments and diseases, and infections such as malaria, as well as inherited hemoglobin or red cell disorders. Effective treatments are available for anemia upon early detection and the treatment method is highly dependent on the cause of anemia. There is a need for point-of-care (POC) screening, early diagnosis, and monitoring of anemia, which is currently not widely accessible due to technical challenges and cost, especially in low- and middle-income countries where anemia is most prevalent. This review first introduces the evolution of anemia detection methods followed by their implementation in current commercially available POC anemia diagnostic devices. Then, emerging POC anemia detection technologies leveraging new methods are reviewed. Finally, we highlight the future trends of integrating anemia detection with the diagnosis of relevant underlying disorders to accurately identify specific root causes and to facilitate personalized treatment and care.

Noninvasive hematocrit assessment for cardiovascular magnetic resonance extracellular volume quantification using a point-of-care device and synthetic derivation

BACKGROUND

Calculation of cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) extracellular volume (ECV) requires input of hematocrit, which may not be readily available. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of ECV calculated using various noninvasive measures of hematocrit compared to ECV calculated with input of laboratory hematocrit as the reference standard.

METHODS

One hundred twenty three subjects (47.7 ± 14.1 years; 42% male) were prospectively recruited for CMR T1 mapping between August 2016 and April 2017. Laboratory hematocrit was assessed by venipuncture. Noninvasive hematocrit was assessed with a point-of-care (POC) device (Pronto-7® Pulse CO-Oximeter®, Masimo Personal Health, Irvine, California, USA) and by synthetic derivation based on the relationship with blood pool T1 values. Left ventricular ECV was calculated with input of laboratory hematocrit (Lab-ECV), POC hematocrit (POC-ECV), and synthetic hematocrit (synthetic-ECV), respectively. Statistical analysis included Wilcoxon signed-rank test, Bland-Altman analysis, receiver-operating curve analysis and intra-class correlation (ICC).

RESULTS

There was no significant difference between Lab-ECV and POC-ECV (27.1 ± 4.7% vs. 27.3 ± 4.8%, p = 0.106), with minimal bias and modest precision (bias - 0.18%, 95%CI [- 2.85, 2.49]). There was no significant difference between Lab-ECV and synthetic-ECV (26.7 ± 4.4% vs. 26.5 ± 4.3%, p = 0.084) in subjects imaged at 1.5 T, although bias was slightly higher and limits of agreement were wider (bias 0.23%, 95%CI [- 2.82, 3.27]). For discrimination of abnormal Lab-ECV ≥30%, POC-ECV had good diagnostic performance (sensitivity 85%, specificity 96%, accuracy 94%, and AUC 0.902) and synthetic-ECV had moderate diagnostic performance (sensitivity 71%, specificity 98%, accuracy 93%, and AUC 0.849). POC-ECV had excellent test-retest (ICC 0.994, 95%CI[0.987, 0.997]) and inter-observer agreement (ICC 0.974, 95%CI[0.929, 0.991]).

CONCLUSIONS

Myocardial ECV can be accurately and reproducibly calculated with input of hematocrit measured using a noninvasive POC device, potentially overcoming an important barrier to implementation of ECV. Further evaluation of synthetic ECV is required prior to clinical implementation.

Results of a Prospective Study Evaluating a Noninvasive Method of Hemoglobin Adjustment for Determining the Diffusing Capacity of the Lung

RATIONALE

Measurement of the diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide (Dl_CO) is significantly influenced by the pulmonary capillary blood volume. Consequently, measurements require adjustment for blood hemoglobin concentration (Dl_COadj) to allow meaningful clinical interpretation. Noninvasive point-of-care devices that measure hemoglobin transcutaneously provide immediate values for hemoglobin that may be useful in pulmonary function laboratories for determining Dl_COadj.

OBJECTIVES

To test the hypothesis that Dl_COadj determinations obtained with a commercially available device for noninvasive, point-of-care measurement of blood hemoglobin concentrations are not significantly different from determinations obtained using hemoglobin concentrations measured conventionally in venous blood samples.

METHODS

In a prospective open trial, hemoglobin measurements were obtained with the Pronto-7 spot check pulse CO-oximeter (Massimo, Irvine, CA) and by venipuncture for 205 patients referred for Dl_CO testing at Cincinnati Children's Hospital. Hemoglobin and Dl_COadj measurements were compared between the two methods, using Student paired t tests and Bland-Altman plots. To assess variability, the differences in Dl_COadj between the two methods were also compared by a modification of the current standard for acceptable within-session variability for Dl_CO. Clinical interpretation for individual Dl_CO tests based on Dl_COadj values obtained from the two methods were compared statistically using Kendall's coefficient of concordance to determine whether the Pronto-7 altered the classification of the severity of Dl_CO defects.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Measurements of hemoglobin concentration by the Pronto-7 analyzer were significantly lower than those obtained from venipuncture blood samples (13.1 ± 1.8 vs. 13.4 ± 2.0; P = 0.01). However, there were no differences for Dl_COadj between both methods (23.6 ± 7.7 vs. 23.7 ± 7.5 ml/min/mm Hg; P = 0.42). There was strong correlation between the Pronto-7 and venipuncture Dl_COadj values (r = 0.99, P < 0.0001). Variability between the two methods was low for Dl_COadj, with a bias of -0.07. More than 96% of tests met acceptable within-session variability. There was no significant difference in the clinical interpretation of the Dl_CO test based on Dl_COadj values recovered from both methods (Kendall's coefficient, 0.96).

CONCLUSIONS

Noninvasive measurement of hemoglobin for determination of Dl_COadj was accurate and provided acceptable within-session variability. The results obtained noninvasively did not alter clinical interpretation of test results compared with venipuncture. These findings support noninvasive point-of-care devices as an alternative to venipuncture for determining hemoglobin to measure Dl_COadj in most patients.

Noninvasive Hemoglobin Monitoring: A Rapid, Reliable, and Cost-Effective Method Following Total Joint Replacement

BACKGROUND

Noninvasive hemoglobin (nHgb) monitoring was initially introduced in the intensive care setting as a means of rapidly assessing Hgb values without performing a blood draw. We conducted a prospective analysis to compare reliability, cost, and patient preference between nHgb monitoring and invasive Hgb (iHgb) monitoring performed via a traditional blood draw.

METHODS

We enrolled 100 consecutive patients undergoing primary or revision total hip or total knee arthroplasty. On postoperative day 1, nHgb and iHgb values were obtained within thirty minutes of one another. iHgb and nHgb values, cost, patient satisfaction, and the duration of time required to obtain each reading were recorded. The concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) was utilized to evaluate the agreement of the two Hgb measurement methods. Paired t tests and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were utilized to compare mean Hgb values, time, and pain for all readings.

RESULTS

The mean Hgb values did not differ significantly between the two measurement methods: the mean iHgb value (and standard deviation) was 11.3 ± 1.4 g/dL (range, 8.2 to 14.3 g/dL), and the mean nHgb value was 11.5 ± 1.8 g/dL (range, 7.0 to 16.0 g/dL) (p = 0.11). The CCC between the two Hgb methods was 0.69. One hundred percent of the patients with an nHgb value of ≥ 10.5 g/dL had an iHgb value of >8.0 g/dL. The mean time to obtain an Hgb value was 0.9 minute for the nHgb method and 51.1 minutes for the iHgb method (p < 0.001). At our institution, the cost of iHgb monitoring is approximately $28 per blood draw compared with $2 for each nHgb measurement, resulting in a savings of $26 per Hgb assessment when the noninvasive method is used.

CONCLUSIONS

Noninvasive Hgb monitoring was found to be more efficient, less expensive, and preferred by patients compared with iHgb monitoring. Providers could consider screening total joint arthroplasty patients with nHgb monitoring and only order iHgb measurement if the nHgb value is <10.5 g/dL. If this protocol had been applied to the first blood draw in our 100 patients, approximately $2000 would have been saved. Extrapolated to the U.S. total joint arthroplasty practice, approximately $20 million could be saved annually.