Abstract
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.
Funding source: Siemens Healthineers (Ankara City Hospital, TURKEY)
Acknowledgments
Many thanks to Siemens Healthineers (Ankara, Turkey) for supplying the sample tubes and analyzing the laboratory tests free of charge.
-
Research funding: Siemens Healthineers (Ankara City Hospital, TURKEY) supplied the sample tubes and the laboratory tests analysis free of charge. It has no benefit or interest from this study.
-
Author contributions: All authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this manuscript and approved its submission.
-
Competing interests: Authors state no conflict of interest.
-
Informed consent: Informed consent was obtained from all individuals included in this study.
-
Ethical approval: This study was approved by the Ankara Yildirim Beyazit University Ethics Board (Date, 17.07.2019; Decision number, 83).
References
1. Fernandes, CM, Worster, A, Eva, K, Hill, S, McCallum, C. Pneumatic tube delivery system for blood samples reduces turnaround times without affecting sample quality. J Emerg Nurs 2006;32:139–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jen.2005.11.013.Search in Google Scholar
2. Pupek, A, Matthewson, B, Whitman, E, Fullarton, R, Chen, Y. Comparison of pneumatic tube system with manual transport for routine chemistry, hematology, coagulation and blood gas tests. Clin Chem Lab Med 2017;55:1537–44. https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2016-1157.Search in Google Scholar
3. Streichert, T, Otto, B, Schnabel, C, Nordholt, G, Haddad, M, Maric, M, et al.. Determination of hemolysis thresholds by the use of data loggers in pneumatic tube systems. Clin Chem 2011;57:1390–7. https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2011.167932.Search in Google Scholar
4. Gomez-Rioja, R, Fernandez-Calle, P, Alcaide, MJ, Madero, R, Oliver, P, Iturzaeta, JM, et al.. Interindividual variability of hemolysis in plasma samples during pneumatic tube system transport. Clin Chem Lab Med 2013;51:e231–3. https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2013-0171.Search in Google Scholar
5. Cui, M, Jing, R, Wang, H. Changes of serum lactate dehydrogenase and potassium levels produced by a pneumatic tube system. Lab Med 2009;40:728–31. https://doi.org/10.1309/lmznz2y1p3krdqyl.Search in Google Scholar
6. Kosem, A, Topcuoglu, C, Sezer, S, Demir, E, Turhan, T. The effects of transport by pneumatic tube system on urine analysis. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 2021;81:361–4. https://doi.org/10.1080/00365513.2021.1923058.Search in Google Scholar
7. Kara, H, Bayir, A, Ak, A, Degirmenci, S, Akinci, M, Agacayak, A, et al.. Hemolysis associated with pneumatic tube system transport for blood samples. Pakistan J Med Sci 2014;30:50–8. https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.301.4228.Search in Google Scholar
8. Wallin, O, Soderberg, J, Grankvist, K, Jonsson, PA, Hultdin, J. Preanalytical effects of pneumatic tube transport on routine hematology, coagulation parameters, platelet function and global coagulation. Clin Chem Lab Med 2008;46:1443–9. https://doi.org/10.1515/CCLM.2008.288.Search in Google Scholar
9. Kavsak, PA, Mansour, M, Wang, L, Campeau, S, Clark, L, Brooks, D, et al.. Assessing pneumatic tube systems with patient-specific populations and laboratory-derived criteria. Clin Chem 2012;58:792–5. https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2011.179044.Search in Google Scholar
10. Strubi-Vuillaume, I, Carlier, V, Obeuf, C, Vasseur, F, Maury, JC, Maboudou, P, et al.. Gentle blood aspiration and tube cushioning reduce pneumatic tube system interference in lactate dehydrogenase assays. Ann Clin Biochem 2015;53:295–7. https://doi.org/10.1177/0004563215586600.Search in Google Scholar
11. Sodi, R, Darn, SM, Stott, A. Pneumatic tube system induced haemolysis: assessing sample type susceptibility to haemolysis. Ann Clin Biochem 2004;41:237–40. https://doi.org/10.1258/000456304323019631.Search in Google Scholar
12. Böckel-Frohnhöfer, N, Hübner, U, Hummel, B, Geisel, J. Pneumatic tube-transported blood samples in lithium heparinate gel separator tubes may be more susceptible to haemolysis than blood samples in serum tubes. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 2014;74:599–602. https://doi.org/10.3109/00365513.2014.921931.Search in Google Scholar
13. Evliyaoglu, O, Toprak, G, Tekin, A, Basarali, MK, Kilinc, C, Colpan, L. Effect of pneumatic tube delivery system rate and distance on hemolysis of blood specimens. J Clin Lab Anal 2012;26:66–9.10.1002/jcla.21484Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
14. Gossez, M, Poitevin-Later, F, Demaret, J, Jallades, L, Venet, F, Malcus, C, et al.. Effect of pneumatic tube transport on T lymphocyte subsets analysis. Cytometry B Clin Cytometry 2015;88:371–4. https://doi.org/10.1002/cyto.b.21231.Search in Google Scholar
15. Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments. New CLIA proposed rules for acceptance limits for proficiency testing. Available from: https://www.westgard.com/2019-clia-changes.htm [Accessed 30 Dec 2021].Search in Google Scholar
16. Health Services General Management/Department of Examination and Diagnosis Services. Total allowable error rates by T.C. Ministry of Health. Available from: https://shgmtetkikdb.saglik.gov.tr/Eklenti/2581/0/genelge-201618izin-verilen-toplam-hata-sinirlaripdf.pdf [Accessed 30 Dec 2021].Search in Google Scholar
17. Chen, J, Gorman, M, O’Reilly, B, Chen, Y. Analytical evaluation of the epoc(R) point-of-care blood analysis system in cardiopulmonary bypass patients. Clin Biochem 2016;49:708–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2015.12.015.Search in Google Scholar
18. Ding, X, Wen, X, Wang, L, Chen, T, Zhou, G, He, H, et al.. Effects of a pneumatic tube system on the hemolysis of blood samples: a PRISMA-compliant meta-analysis. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 2021;81:343–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/00365513.2021.1930140.Search in Google Scholar
19. Lima-Oliveira, G, Lippi, G, Salvagno, G, Dima, F, Brocco, G, Picheth, G, et al.. Management of preanalytical phase for routine hematological testing: is the pneumatic tube system a source of laboratory variability or an important facility tool? Int J Lab Hematol 2014;36:e37–40. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijlh.12143.Search in Google Scholar
20. Al-Riyami, AZ, Al-Khabori, M, Al-Hadhrami, RM, Al-Azwani, IS, Davis, HM, Al-Farsi, KS, et al.. The pneumatic tube system does not affect complete blood count results; a validation study at a tertiary care hospital. Int J Lab Hematol 2014;36:514–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijlh.12180.Search in Google Scholar
21. Weaver, DK, Miller, D, Leventhal, EA, Tropeano, V. Evaluation of a computer-directed pneumatic-tube system for pneumatic transport of blood specimens. Am J Clin Pathol 1978;70:400–5. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcp/70.3.400.Search in Google Scholar
22. Steige, H, Jones, JD. Evaluation of pneumatic-tube system for delivery of blood specimens. Clin Chem 1971;17:1160–4. https://doi.org/10.1093/clinchem/17.12.1160.Search in Google Scholar
23. Suchsland, J, Winter, T, Greiser, A, Streichert, T, Otto, B, Mayerle, J, et al.. Extending laboratory automation to the wards: effect of an innovative pneumatic tube system on diagnostic samples and transport time. Clin Chem Lab Med 2017;55:225–30. https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2016-0380.Search in Google Scholar
24. Koçak, E, Yontem, M, Yücel, O, Cilo, M, Genc, O, Meral, A. The effects of transport by pneumatic tube system on blood cell count, erythrocyte sedimentation and coagulation tests. Biochem Med 2013;23:206–10.10.11613/BM.2013.024Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
25. Sari, I, Arslan, A, Ozlu, C, Hacioglu, S, Dogu, MH, Isler, K, et al.. The effect of pneumatic tube system on complete blood count parameters and thrombocyte donation in healthy donors. Transfus Apher Sci 2012;47:81–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.transci.2012.05.005.Search in Google Scholar
26. Wang, H, Wang, L, Liang, H, Wei, J, Wu, Y, Wang, X, et al.. Falsely decreased FVIII activity following pneumatic tube transport. Int J Lab Hematol 2021;43:305–10. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijlh.13363.Search in Google Scholar
27. Farnsworth, C, Webber, D, Krekeler, J, Budelier, M, Bartlett, N, Gronowski, A. Parameters for validating a hospital pneumatic tube system. Clin Chem 2019;65:301408. https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2018.301408.Search in Google Scholar
28. Gils, C, Broell, F, Vinholt, PJ, Nielsen, C, Nybo, M. Use of clinical data and acceleration profiles to validate pneumatic transportation systems. Clin Chem Lab Med 2020;58:560–8. https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2019-0881.Search in Google Scholar
29. Koroglu, M, Erkurt, MA, Kuku, I, Kaya, E, Berber, I, Nizam, I, et al.. Assessing safety of pneumatic tube system (PTS) for patients with very low hematologic parameters. Int J Clin Exp Med 2016;22:1329–33. https://doi.org/10.12659/msm.898164.Search in Google Scholar
30. Garcia, LO, Speransa, DMR, Rodrigues, CB, Benites, RM, Garcia, MT, Sekine, L, et al.. Validation of blood components transport through a pneumatic tube system. Hematol Transfus Cell Ther 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.htct.2021.07.010.Search in Google Scholar
31. Kellerman, PS, Thornbery, JM. Pseudohyperkalemia due to pneumatic tube transport in a leukemic patient. Am J Kidney Dis 2005;46:746–8. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.ajkd.2005.06.005.Search in Google Scholar
32. Stangerup, I, Broell, F, Hoop, JV, Sennels, HP. Pneumatic tube validation: reducing the need for donor samples by integrating a vial-embedded data logger. Ann Clin Biochem 2021;58:280–8. https://doi.org/10.1177/0004563221992822.Search in Google Scholar
Supplementary Material
The online version of this article offers supplementary material (https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2021-1235).
© 2022 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
