Download PDF
Semin Thromb Hemost 2014; 40(02): 178-185
DOI: 10.1055/s-0033-1364206
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Technological Advances in the Hemostasis Laboratory

Giuseppe Lippi
1   Laboratory of Clinical Chemistry and Hematology, Academic Hospital of Parma, Parma, Italy
,
Mario Plebani
2   Department of Laboratory Medicine, Academic Hospital of Padova, Padova, Italy
,
Emmanuel J. Favaloro
3   Department of Haematology, Institute of Clinical Pathology and Medical Research (ICPMR), Pathology West, Westmead Hospital, New South Wales, Australia
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
17 January 2014 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Automation is conventionally defined as the use of machines, control systems, and information technologies to optimize productivity. Although automation is now commonplace in several areas of diagnostic testing, especially in clinical chemistry and immunochemistry, the concept of extending this process to hemostasis testing has only recently been advanced. The leading drawbacks are still represented by the almost unique biological matrix because citrated plasma can only be used for clotting assays and few other notable exceptions, and by the highly specific pretreatment of samples, which is particularly distinct to other test systems. Despite these important limitations, a certain degree of automation is also now embracing hemostasis testing. The more relevant developments include the growing integration of routine hemostasis analyzers with track line systems and workcells, the development of specific instrumentation tools to enhance reliability of testing (i.e., signal detection with different technologies to increase test panels, plasma indices for preanalytical check of interfering substances, failure patterns sensors for identifying insufficient volume, clots or bubbles, cap-piercing for enhancing operator safety, automatic reflex testing, automatic redilution of samples, and laser barcode readers), preanalytical features (e.g., positive identification, automatic systems for tube(s) labeling, transillumination devices), and postphlebotomy tools (pneumatic tube systems for reducing turnaround time, sample transport boxes for ensuring stability of specimens, monitoring systems for identifying unsuitable conditions of transport). Regardless of these important innovations, coagulation/hemostasis testing still requires specific technical and clinical expertise, not only in terms of measurement procedures but also for interpreting and then appropriately utilizing the derived information. Thus, additional and special caution has to be used when designing projects of automation that include coagulation/hemostasis testing because peculiar and particular requirements must be taken into account.

Keywords

coagulation - hemostasis testing - errors - automation - quality
 

  • References

  • 1 Messmore Jr HL. Automation in coagulation testing. Clinical applications. Semin Thromb Hemost 1983; 9 (4) 341-345
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Lippi G, Favaloro EJ, Franchini M, Guidi GC. Milestones and perspectives in coagulation and hemostasis. Semin Thromb Hemost 2009; 35 (1) 9-22
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Lippi G, Favaloro EJ. Laboratory hemostasis: milestones in clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine. Clin Chem Lab Med 2013; 51 (1) 91-97
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Olsen K. The first 110 years of laboratory automation: technologies, applications, and the creative scientist. J Lab Autom 2012; 17 (6) 469-480
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Da Rin G, Lippi G. Total laboratory automation of routine hemostasis testing. J Lab Autom 2013; ; doi: 10.1177/2211068213511246
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Salvagno GL, Lippi G, Bassi A, Poli G, Guidi GC. Prevalence and type of pre-analytical problems for inpatients samples in coagulation laboratory. J Eval Clin Pract 2008; 14 (2) 351-353
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Favaloro EJ, Lippi G, Adcock DM. Preanalytical and postanalytical variables: the leading causes of diagnostic error in hemostasis?. Semin Thromb Hemost 2008; 34 (7) 612-634
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Qari MH. High throughput coagulation analyzers review. Comb Chem High Throughput Screen 2005; 8 (4) 353-360
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Walenga JM, Fareed J. Automation and quality control in the coagulation laboratory. Clin Lab Med 1994; 14 (4) 709-728
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Lippi G, Plebani M, Favaloro EJ. Interference in coagulation testing: focus on spurious hemolysis, icterus, and lipemia. Semin Thromb Hemost 2013; 39 (3) 258-266
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Simundic AM, Nikolac N, Ivankovic V , et al. Comparison of visual vs. automated detection of lipemic, icteric and hemolyzed specimens: can we rely on a human eye?. Clin Chem Lab Med 2009; 47 (11) 1361-1365
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Plebani M, Lippi G. Hemolysis index: quality indicator or criterion for sample rejection?. Clin Chem Lab Med 2009; 47 (8) 899-902
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Fairbanks VF, Ziesmer SC, O'Brien PC. Methods for measuring plasma hemoglobin in micromolar concentration compared. Clin Chem 1992; 38 (1) 132-140
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Malinauskas RA. Plasma hemoglobin measurement techniques for the in vitro evaluation of blood damage caused by medical devices. Artif Organs 1997; 21 (12) 1255-1267
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Sanderink GJ, van Rijn HJ. Quantitative measurement of plasma hemoglobin by second derivative spectrophotometry. Clin Chim Acta 1985; 146 (1) 65-73
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Harboe M. A method for determination of hemoglobin in plasma by near-ultraviolet spectrophotometry. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 1959; 11: 66-70
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Martin-Toutain I, Jobic L, Mancic T, Ankri A. Evaluation of the automated coagulation analyzer Sysmex(®) CS-2100i (Siemens) [in French]. Ann Biol Clin (Paris) 2011; 69 (6) 699-704
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Molenaar PJ, Leyte A. Pre-acquisition system assessment of the Sysmex(®) Coagulation System CS-2100i and comparison with end-user verification; a model for the regional introduction of new analysers and methods. Clin Chem Lab Med 2011; 49 (9) 1479-1489
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Lippi G, Ippolito L, Favaloro EJ. Technical evaluation of the novel preanalytical module on instrumentation laboratory ACL TOP: advancing automation in hemostasis testing. J Lab Autom 2013; 18 (5) 382-390
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Lippi G, Pipitone S, Gennari D, Franchini M. Identification of spurious hemolysis in anticoagulated blood with Sysmex XE-2100 and Siemens Advia 2120. Clin Lab 2012; 58 (7–8) 801-804
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Lippi G, Franchini M. Advancements in laboratory diagnostics: an invaluable tool for assessing quality of blood transfusions. Blood Transfus 2012; 1–2: 1-2
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Banfi G, Salvagno GL, Lippi G. The role of ethylenediamine tetraacetic acid (EDTA) as in vitro anticoagulant for diagnostic purposes. Clin Chem Lab Med 2007; 45 (5) 565-576
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Lippi G, Salvagno GL, Montagnana M, Guidi GC. Influence of two different buffered sodium citrate concentrations on coagulation testing. Blood Coagul Fibrinolysis 2005; 16 (5) 381-383
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Lippi G, Plebani M. Primary blood tubes mixing: time for updated recommendations. Clin Chem Lab Med 2012; 50 (4) 599-600
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. H3–A6 Procedures for the Collection of Diagnostic Blood Specimens by Venipuncture. 6th ed. Wayne, PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2007
    Google Scholar
  • 26 Lippi G, Caputo M, Banfi G , et al. Recommendations for collection of venous blood. Biochim Clin 2008; 32: 569-577
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Favaloro EJ, Adcock Funk DM, Lippi G. Pre-analytical variables in coagulation testing associated with diagnostic errors in hemostasis. Lab Med 2012; 43 (2) 1-10
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Bonar R, Favaloro EJ, Adcock DM. Quality in coagulation and haemostasis testing. Biochem Med (Zagreb) 2010; 20 (2) 184-199
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Lima-Oliveira G, Lippi G, Salvagno GL , et al. Effects of vigorous mixing of blood vacuum tubes on laboratory test results. Clin Biochem 2013; 46 (3) 250-254
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Lippi G, Salvagno GL, Bassi A, Montagnana M, Poli G, Guidi GC. Dishomogeneous separation of citrated plasma in primary collection tubes for routine coagulation testing. Blood Coagul Fibrinolysis 2008; 19 (4) 330-332
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Caskey CR. Ergonomics in the clinical laboratory. Clin Lab Sci 1999; 12 (3) 140-144
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Lippi G, Guidi GC, Mattiuzzi C, Plebani M. Preanalytical variability: the dark side of the moon in laboratory testing. Clin Chem Lab Med 2006; 44 (4) 358-365
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Lippi G, Chance JJ, Church S , et al. Preanalytical quality improvement: from dream to reality. Clin Chem Lab Med 2011; 49 (7) 1113-1126
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Simundic AM, Lippi G. Preanalytical phase—a continuous challenge for laboratory professionals. Biochem Med (Zagreb) 2012; 22 (2) 145-149
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Lippi G, Becan-McBride K, Behúlová D , et al. Preanalytical quality improvement: in quality we trust. Clin Chem Lab Med 2013; 51 (1) 229-241
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Lippi G, Salvagno GL, Montagnana M, Poli G, Guidi GC. Influence of the needle bore size on platelet count and routine coagulation testing. Blood Coagul Fibrinolysis 2006; 17 (7) 557-561
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Lippi G, Salvagno GL, Guidi GC. No influence of a butterfly device on routine coagulation assays and D-dimer measurement. J Thromb Haemost 2005; 3 (2) 389-391
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Lippi G, Guidi GC. Effect of specimen collection on routine coagulation assays and D-dimer measurement. Clin Chem 2004; 50 (11) 2150-2152
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Lippi G, Franchini M, Montagnana M, Salvagno GL, Poli G, Guidi GC. Quality and reliability of routine coagulation testing: can we trust that sample?. Blood Coagul Fibrinolysis 2006; 17 (7) 513-519
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Preston FE, Lippi G, Favaloro EJ, Jayandharan GR, Edison ES, Srivastava A. Quality issues in laboratory haemostasis. Haemophilia 2010; 16 (Suppl. 05) 93-99
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Lippi G, Blanckaert N, Bonini P , et al. Causes, consequences, detection, and prevention of identification errors in laboratory diagnostics. Clin Chem Lab Med 2009; 47 (2) 143-153
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Lippi G, Plebani M. Identification errors in the blood transfusion laboratory: a still relevant issue for patient safety. Transfus Apheresis Sci 2011; 44 (2) 231-233
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Lippi G, Salvagno GL, Montagnana M, Guidi GC. Short-term venous stasis influences routine coagulation testing. Blood Coagul Fibrinolysis 2005; 16 (6) 453-458
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 The Joint Commission. National Patient Safety Goals Effective January 1, 2011. Available at: http://www.jointcommission.org/assets/1/6/NPSG_Chapter_Jan2012_OBS.pdf . Accessed: October 13, 2013
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Da Rin G. Pre-analytical workstations: a tool for reducing laboratory errors. Clin Chim Acta 2009; 404 (1) 68-74
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Lippi G, Sonntag O, Plebani M. Appropriate labelling of blood collection tubes: a step ahead towards patient's safety. Clin Chem Lab Med 2011; 49 (12) 1921-1923
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Lima-Oliveira G, Lippi G, Salvagno GL, Montagnana M, Picheth G, Guidi GC. Impact of the phlebotomy training based on CLSI/NCCLS H03-a6 - procedures for the collection of diagnostic blood specimens by venipuncture. Biochem Med (Zagreb) 2012; 22 (3) 342-351
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Lima-Oliveira G, Salvagno GL, Lippi G , et al. Elimination of the venous stasis error for routine coagulation testing by transillumination. Clin Chim Acta 2011; 412 (15–16) 1482-1484
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Plebani M, Lippi G. Is laboratory medicine a dying profession? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed. Clin Biochem 2010; 43 (12) 939-941
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Lippi G, Simundic AM. Laboratory networking and sample quality: a still relevant issue for patient safety. Clin Chem Lab Med 2012; 50 (10) 1703-1705
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Pragay DA, Fan P, Brinkley S, Chilcote ME. A computer directed pneumatic tube system: its effects on specimens. Clin Biochem 1980; 13 (6) 259-261
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Kratz A, Salem RO, Van Cott EM. Effects of a pneumatic tube system on routine and novel hematology and coagulation parameters in healthy volunteers. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2007; 131 (2) 293-296
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Wallin O, Söderberg J, Grankvist K, Jonsson PA, Hultdin J. Preanalytical effects of pneumatic tube transport on routine haematology, coagulation parameters, platelet function and global coagulation. Clin Chem Lab Med 2008; 46 (10) 1443-1449
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Plebani M, Zaninotto M. Pneumatic tube delivery systems for patient samples: evidence of quality and quality of evidence. Clin Chem Lab Med 2011; 49 (8) 1245-1246
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 Dyszkiewicz-Korpanty A, Quinton R, Yassine J, Sarode R. The effect of a pneumatic tube transport system on PFA-100 trade mark closure time and whole blood platelet aggregation. J Thromb Haemost 2004; 2 (2) 354-356
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Bolliger D, Seeberger MD, Tanaka KA , et al. Pre-analytical effects of pneumatic tube transport on impedance platelet aggregometry. Platelets 2009; 20 (7) 458-465
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Hübner U, Böckel-Frohnhöfer N, Hummel B, Geisel J. The effect of a pneumatic tube transport system on platelet aggregation using optical aggregometry and the PFA-100. Clin Lab 2010; 56 (1–2) 59-64
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 58 Amann G, Zehntner C, Marti F, Colucci G. Effect of acceleration forces during transport through a pneumatic tube system on ROTEM® analysis. Clin Chem Lab Med 2012; 50 (8) 1335-1342
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 59 Lippi G, Lima-Oliveira G, Nazer SC , et al. Suitability of a transport box for blood sample shipment over a long period. Clin Biochem 2011; 44 (12) 1028-1029
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 60 Zaninotto M, Tasinato A, Padoan A , et al. An integrated system for monitoring the quality of sample transportation. Clin Biochem 2012; 45 (9) 688-690
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 61 Zaninotto M, Tasinato A, Padoan A , et al. Effects of sample transportation on commonly requested laboratory tests. Clin Chem Lab Med 2012; 50 (10) 1755-1760
    PubMedGoogle Scholar