The effects of transport by pneumatic tube system on urine analysis

Urine transfer devices may impact urinary particle results: a pre-analytical study

OBJECTIVES

Well-standardized procedures in the pre-analytical phase of urine diagnostics is of utmost importance to obtain reliable results. We investigated the effect of different urine collection methods and the associated urine transfer tubes on urine test strip and particle results.

METHODS

In total, 146 selected urine samples were subdivided into three different collection containers and subsequently transferred into its accompanying transfer tube (BD, Greiner, Sarstedt vacuum and Sarstedt aspiration). As reference, the original urine sample was directly measured on the analyser. Both chemical test strip analysis (Sysmex UC-3500) and fluorescence flow cytometry particle analysis (Sysmex UF-5000) were performed on all samples.

RESULTS

No statistically significant differences in test strip results were found between the studied transfer methods. On the contrary, transfer of urine samples to the secondary tubes affected their particle counts. Clinically significant reductions in counts of renal tubular epithelial cells and hyaline casts were observed using the BD and Greiner transfer tubes and in counts of pathological casts using the BD, Greiner and Sarstedt vacuum tubes.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study indicate that the use of urine transfer tubes may impact counts of fragile urine particles. Clinical laboratories need to be aware about the variation that urine collection methods can induce on urine particle counts.

Investigation of the effects of pneumatic tube transport system on routine biochemistry, hematology, and coagulation tests in Ankara City Hospital

OBJECTIVES

Academics are far from a consensus regarding the effects of pneumatic tube system (PTS) delivery on sample integrity and laboratory test results. As for the reasons for conflicting opinions, each PTS is uniquely designed, sample tubes and patient characteristics differ among studies. This study aims to validate the PTS utilized in Ankara City Hospital for routine chemistry, coagulation, and hematology tests by comparing samples delivered via PTS and porter.

METHODS

The study comprises 50 healthy volunteers. Blood samples were drawn into three biochemistry, two coagulation, and two hemogram tubes from each participant. Each of the duplicate samples was transferred to the emergency laboratory via Swiss log PTS (aka PTS-immediately) or by a porter. The last of the biochemistry tubes were delivered via the PTS, upon completion of coagulation of the blood (aka PTS-after). The results of the analysis in these groups were compared with multiple statistical analyses.

RESULTS

The study did not reveal any correlation between the PTS and serum hemolysis index. There were statistically significant differences in several biochemistry tests. However, none of them reached the clinical significance threshold. Basophil and large unidentified cell (LUC) tests had poor correlations (r=0.47 and r=0.60; respectively) and reached clinical significance threshold (the average percentages of bias, 10.2%, and 15.4%, respectively). The remainder of the hematology and coagulation parameters did not reach clinical significance level either.

CONCLUSIONS

The modern PTS validated in this study is safe for sample transportation for routine chemistry, coagulation, and hematology tests frequently requested in healthy individuals except for basophil and LUC.