Frequency and classification of errors in laboratory medicine at a veterinary teaching hospital in the United States

Influence of haemolysis on blood biochemistry profiles in cattle

Although haemolysis is the most common source of preanalytical error in clinical laboratories, its influence on cattle biochemistry remains poorly understood. The effect of haemolysis and its clinical relevance were investigated in 70 samples in which haemolysis was artificially induced (by spiking with increasing amounts of haemolysate, yielding 0.0%, 0.2%, 0.5%, 1.0%, 2.5%, 5.0% and 10% haemolysis degree (HD)), focusing on key parameters for bovine metabolic health assessment, including albumin, alkaline phosphatase (ALP), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), blood urea nitrogen (BUN), calcium (Ca), cholesterol, creatinine, creatine kinase (CK), gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT), globulins, magnesium (Mg), phosphorus (P), total bilirubin (TBIL) and total proteins (TP). Preanalytical haemolysis significantly affected most (8 of 14) of the biochemical parameters analysed, leading to significant increases in concentrations of albumin (starting at 5% HD), cholesterol (at 5% HD) and P (at 10% HD) and to significant decreases in Ca (at 2.5% HD), creatinine (at 5% HD), globulins (at 10% HD), TBIL (at 2.5% HD) and TP (at 10% HD). Comparison of the present and previous data indicated that, for each parameter, the HD required to produce significant bias and the clinical relevance of over- and underestimation are variable and appear to depend on the analytical technique used. Therefore, different laboratories should evaluate the influence of haemolysis in their analytical results and provide advice to clinicians accordingly. Affected parameters should be interpreted together with clinical signs and other analytical data to minimize misinterpretations (false or masked variations). Finally, due to the significant impact on numerous parameters and the limited potential for correction, we recommend rejection of samples with >10% HD.

Evaluation of canine and feline leukocyte differential counts obtained with the scil vCell 5 compared to the Advia 2120 hematology analyzer and a manual method

The vCell 5 (scil Animal Care), a point-of-care hematology analyzer (POCA), was recently introduced to veterinary laboratories. This laser- and impedance-based analyzer is capable of providing a CBC with 5-part WBC differential count (Diff) along with WBC cytograms and flags serving as interpretation aids for numerical results. We compared the scil POCA-Diff to reference methods (i.e., manual differential count, Advia 2120 hematology analyzer [Siemens]) for canine and feline blood samples and considered WBC cytograms and flags. Total observed error (TEo), calculated from CV and bias%, was compared to total allowable error (TEa). Data were analyzed before and after a review process (exclusion of flagged and samples with invalid cytograms). For both species, correlation was good-to-excellent (rs = 0.81-0.97) between both analyzers for all variables, except for feline monocytes (rs = 0.21-0.63) and canine monocyte% (rs = 0.50). Smallest biases were seen for neutrophils (dog: -5.7 to 0.8%; cat: 1.5-9.4%) with both reference methods. Quality requirements (TEo < TEa) were fulfilled for canine and feline neutrophils (TEo = 5.3-10.6%, TEa = 15%) and eosinophils (TEo = 67.1-83%, TEa = (90)-50%) considering at least one reference method. Our review process led to mildly higher rs-values for most variables. Although not completely satisfactory, the scil POCA provides reliable results in compliance with ASVCP quality goals for canine and feline neutrophils and eosinophils. Analyzer flag and cytogram analysis served as useful tools for QA, indicating the necessity for manual review of blood smears, and contributed to improvement of scil POCA performance.

Comparative study of immunohematological tests with canine blood samples submitted for a direct antiglobulin (Coombs') test

BACKGROUND

A 2019 ACVIM consensus statement on diagnostics for immune-mediated hemolytic anemia (IMHA) in dogs made testing recommendations. As data on the performance of immunohematological tests was lacking, we undertook a comparative analysis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Anticoagulated blood samples from 126 dogs suspected of having IMHA submitted to a diagnostic veterinary laboratory for a routine direct antiglobulin test (DAT) and from 28 healthy control dogs were evaluated for spherocytosis and autoagglutination before and after three saline washes. Samples were also subjected to different DATs: a gel minitube and an immunochromatographic strip kit used in clinics; neutral gel column cards, microtiter plates (at 4°, 22°, and 37°C), capillary tubes, and flow cytometry used in laboratories.

RESULTS

Samples from healthy dogs yielded negative results with all immunodiagnostic tests. Among the 126 samples submitted for DAT 67 were positive by a DAT utilizing microtiter plates with goat anti-dog antiglobulin DAT at 22°C. Notably, DAT results were comparable and consistent across all evaluated methods regardless of antiglobulin and temperature used. DAT+ dogs were more severely anemic and more likely to have erythroid regeneration compared to DAT- dogs. Macroscopic agglutination in tubes or on slides was observed in 48 samples after 1:1 and 1:4 blood to saline dilution, but only persisted in four samples after washing. Among the DAT+ samples, 57% had agglutination, 87% had spherocytosis, and 45% had both. There was good correlation between spherocytosis and DAT results from the six DAT techniques, but the correlation with autoagglutination was only fair. Clinical follow-up was available for 42 dogs. Of the sample from 12 DAT+ dogs collected during treatment, 10 remained DAT+ when tested 1-24 weeks after initial assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

Based upon this comparative prospective survey, all in-clinic and laboratory DAT techniques produced similar results when performed by trained personnel and can therefore be recommended for detection of antibody-coated erythrocytes and immunohematological diagnosis. In addition, use of these tests for monitoring response of IMHA dogs to treatment might be valuable.