Influence of two different buffered sodium citrate concentrations on coagulation testing

Preanalytical Variables in Hemostasis Testing

Hemostasis testing performed in clinical laboratories are critical for assessing hemorrhagic and thrombotic disorders. The assays performed can be used to provide the information required for diagnosis, risk assessment, efficacy of therapy, and therapeutic monitoring. As such, hemostasis tests should be performed to the highest level of quality, including the standardization, implementation, and monitoring of all phases of the testing, which include the preanalytical, analytical, and post-analytical phases. It is well established that the preanalytical phase is the most critical component of the testing process, being the hands-on activities, including patient preparation for blood collection, as well as the actual blood collection, including sample identification and the post-collection handling to include sample transportation, processing, and storage of samples when testing is not performed immediately. The purpose of this article is to provide an update to the previous edition of coagulation testing-related preanalytical variables (PAV) and, when properly addressed and performed, can reduce the most common causes of errors in the hemostasis laboratory.

Investigation of two different human d-dimer assays in the horse

Background

D-dimer has value as a marker of thrombosis in critically ill horses and can provide additional information about prognosis. However, there are currently no equine species-specific d-dimer assays available, nor has there been any formal investigation of the applicability of human d-dimer assays in horses, so it is unknown, which assay performs best in this species. The aim of this study was therefore to evaluate and compare two human d-dimer assays for their applicability in horses.

The study included four groups of horses: clinically healthy horses, horses with gastrointestinal (GI) disease and mild systemic inflammation based on low serum amyloid A (SAA) (low SAA group), horses with GI disease and strong systemic inflammation based on high SAA (high SAA group) and, horses with thrombotic GI disease caused by Strongylus vulgaris (also called non-strangulating intestinal infarction (NSII)) (NSII group). The assays evaluated were the STAGO STA-Liatest D-di + (Stago) and NycoCard™ D-dimer (NycoCard). Intra- and inter-coefficients of variation (CV) were assessed on two d-dimer concentrations, and linearity under dilution was evaluated. A group comparison was performed for both assays across the four groups of horses. A Spaghetti plot, Spearman Correlation, Passing Bablok regression and Bland–Altman plot were used to compare methods in terms of agreement.

Results

Ten horses were included in the clinically healthy group, eight in the low SAA group, eight in the high SAA group, and seven in the NSII group. For the Stago assay, intra- and inter-CVs were below the accepted level except for one inter-CV. The NycoCard assay did not meet the accepted level for any of the CVs. The linearity under dilution was acceptable for both the Stago and NycoCard. In the group comparison, both methods detected a significantly higher d-dimer concentration in the high SAA and NSII groups compared to the clinically healthy group. Method agreement showed slightly higher d-dimer concentrations with NycoCard compared to Stago. The overall agreement was stronger for the lower d-dimer concentrations.

Conclusion

Both the Stago and the NycoCard were found to be applicable for use in horses but were not directly comparable.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12917-022-03313-5.

The Effect of 3.2% and 3.8% Sodium Citrate on Specialized Coagulation Tests

Context.—

Coagulation testing is challenging and depends on preanalytic factors, including the citrate buffer concentration used.

Objective.—

To better estimate preanalytic effects of the citrate buffer concentration in use, the difference between results obtained by samples with 3.2% and 3.8% citrate was evaluated.

Design.—

In a prospective observational study with 76 volunteers, differences related to the citrate concentration were evaluated. For both buffer concentrations, reference range intervals were established according to the recommendations of the C28-A3 guideline published by the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute.

Results.—

In our reagent-analyzer settings, most parameters evaluated presented good comparability between citrated samples taken with 3.2% and 3.8% trisodium buffer. The ellagic acid containing activated partial thromboplastin time reagent (aPTT-FS) indicated a systemic and proportional difference between both buffer concentrations, leading to an alteration in its reference ranges. Further, a confirmation test for lupus anticoagulant assessment (Staclot LA) showed only a moderate correlation (rρ = 0.511) with a proportional deviation between both citrate concentrations. Further, a statistically significant difference was found in the diluted Russell viper venom time confirmation testing, coagulation factors V and VIII, and the protein C activity, which was found to be of minor clinical relevance.

Conclusions.—

With caution regarding the potential impact of the reagent-analyzer combination, our findings demonstrate the comparability of data assessed with 3.2% and 3.8% buffered citrated plasma. As an exception, the aPTT-FS and the Staclot LA assay were considerably affected by the citrate concentration used. Further studies are required to confirm our finding using different reagent-analyzer combinations.

Preanalytical Issues in Hemostasis and Thrombosis Testing

Hemostasis testing is critical to many hemorrhagic and thrombotic disorders, wherein laboratory diagnostics can provide critical information for diagnosis, prognostication, and therapeutic monitoring. Due to this crucial role in modern medicine, hemostasis tests should be carried out at their highest degree of quality, thus encompassing standardization and monitoring of all phases of the testing process. It is now clearly established that the preanalytical phase is the most critical and vulnerable part of the total testing process, since up to 70% of diagnostic errors are due to highly manual activities encompassing patient preparation and collection of biological samples, as well as handling, transportation, preparation and storage of blood specimens. Due to the peculiar sample matrix required for hemostasis testing (i.e., plasma anticoagulated with buffered sodium citrate), additional critical issues may impair the reliability of these tests. Therefore, this article aims to provide an updated overview of the most important preanalytical variables that may ultimately impair the quality of hemostasis and thrombosis testing.

Impact of the phlebotomy training based on CLSI/NCCLS H03-a6 - procedures for the collection of diagnostic blood specimens by venipuncture

Introduction:

The activities involving phlebotomy, a critical task for obtaining diagnostic blood samples, are poorly studied as regards the major sources of errors and the procedures related to laboratory quality control. The aim of this study was to verify the compliance with CLSI documents of clinical laboratories from South America and to assess whether teaching phlebotomists to follow the exact procedure for blood collection by venipuncture from CLSI/NCCLS H03-A6 - Procedures for the Collection of Diagnostic Blood Specimens by Venipuncture might improve the quality of the process.

Materials and methods:

A survey was sent by mail to 3674 laboratories from South America to verify the use of CLSI documents. Thirty skilled phlebotomists were trained with the CLSI H03-A6 document to perform venipuncture procedures for a period of 20 consecutive working days. The overall performances of the phlebotomists were further compared before and after the training program.

Results:

2622 from 2781 laboratories that did answer our survey used CLSI documents to standardize their procedures and process. The phlebotomists’ training for 20 days before our evaluation completely eliminated non-conformity procedures for: i) incorrect friction of the forearm, during the cleaning of the venipuncture site to ease vein location; ii) incorrect sequence of vacuum tubes collection; and iii) inadequate mixing of the blood in primary vacuum tubes containing anticoagulants or clot activators. Unfortunately the CLSI H03-A6 document does not caution against both unsuitable tourniquet application time (i.e., for more than one minute) and inappropriate request to clench the fist repeatedly. These inadequate procedures were observed for all phlebotomists.

Conclusion:

We showed that strict observance of the CLSI H03-A6 document can remarkably improve quality, although the various steps for collecting diagnostic blood specimens are not a gold standard, since they may still permit errors. Tourniquet application time and forearm clench should be verified by all quality laboratory managers in the services. Moreover, the procedure for collecting blood specimens should be revised to eliminate this source of laboratory variability and safeguard the quality.

Laboratory reporting of hemostasis assays: the final post-analytical opportunity to reduce errors of clinical diagnosis in hemostasis?

The advent of modern instrumentation, with associated improvements in test performance and reliability, together with appropriate internal quality control (IQC) and external quality assurance (EQA) measures, has led to substantial reductions in analytical errors within hemostasis laboratories. Unfortunately, the reporting of incorrect or inappropriate test results still occurs, perhaps even as frequently as in the past. Many of these cases arise due to a variety of events largely outside the control of the laboratories performing the tests. These events are primarily preanalytical, related to sample collection and processing, but can also include post-analytical events related to the reporting and interpretation of test results. The current report provides an overview of these events, as well as guidance for prevention or minimization. In particular, we propose several strategies for the post-analytical reporting of hemostasis assays, and how this may provide the final opportunity to prevent serious clinical errors in diagnosis. This report should be of interest to both the laboratory scientists working in hemostasis and clinicians that request and attempt to interpret the test results. Laboratory scientists are ultimately responsible for these test results, and there is a duty to provide both accurate and precise results to enable clinicians to manage patients appropriately and to avoid the need to recollect and retest. Also, clinicians will not be in a position to best diagnose and manage their patient unless they gain an appreciation of these issues.

Quality and reliability of routine coagulation testing: can we trust that sample?

Poor standardization of preanalytic variables exerts a strong influence on the reliability of coagulation testing, consuming valuable health care resources and compromising patient outcome. Most uncertainties emerge from patient misidentification and the procedures for specimen collection and handling. Location of unsuitable venous access or problematic phlebotomies may produce spurious activation of the hemostatic system and hemolytic specimens. Prolonged venous stasis is associated with hemoconcentration and spurious variations of most coagulation assays. Additional pitfalls can be introduced by inappropriate phlebotomy tools and small-gauge needles. Inappropriate filling and mixing of the tube, unsuitable procedures for centrifugation and storage of the specimens are additional aspects that need accurate standardization. Besides traditional preanalytic variables affecting routine coagulation testing, thrombin-generation assays require specific criteria to be accurately fulfilled. These aspects include the type of specimen (platelet-poor plasma, platelet-rich plasma or whole blood), blood collection tubes, storage conditions and the presence of residual platelets. Compliance with new international quality assessment programs, which will also involve coagulation laboratories, encompasses the adoption of suitable strategies for reducing undue variability throughout the whole testing process. Such strategies would not entail extraordinary costs and are affordable with a structured outlay of existing resources, educational policies and compliance with reliable guidelines.

Short-term venous stasis influences routine coagulation testing

Preanalytical variability is a common source of errors in coagulation testing, as clotting assays are particularly susceptible to poor standardization of the whole analytical process. To investigate the effect of a short-term venous stasis on routine coagulation testing, we measured activated partial thromboplastin time, prothrombin time, fibrinogen and D-dimer in plasma specimens collected either without venous stasis or following the application of a 60 mmHg constant, standardized external pressure by a sphygmomanometer, for 1 (1-min stasis) and 3 min (3-min stasis). When compared with blood specimens collected without stasis, the Pearson's correlation coefficients and the corresponding slopes of the Passing and Bablok regression line of samples collected following 1 and 3-min stasis were acceptable. However, statistically significant differences by paired Student's t-test could be observed for all parameters tests following 3-min stasis, and for all but the activated partial thromboplastin time after 1-min stasis. Significant difference between specimens collected after 1- and 3-min stasis was also achieved for prothrombin time (P < 0.01), fibrinogen (P < 0.01) and D-dimer (P < 0.05). The agreement between measurements was yet acceptable after 1-min stasis, but achieved clinical significance for prothrombin time, fibrinogen and D-dimer after 3-min stasis. Taken together, results of the present investigation confirm that the effects of venous stasis during venipuncture are clinically meaningful. As hematocrit values and activities of clotting factors VII, VIII and XII significantly increased, whereas that of activated factor VII remained unchanged, we hypothesize that a short-term venous stasis, as induced by up to 3-min tourniquet placing, might not be sufficient to produce additional procoagulant responses besides hemoconcentration.