Comparison of two different methods for the determination of erythrocyte sedimentation rate

Abstract

Objective: Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR) can be used for the follow-up of number of diseases. In recent years, closed automated systems that measure ESR directly from a capped EDTA and citrate blood sample tube have been developed. In this study, we aimed to compare and evaluate the consistence of assay results of iSed Alcor Auto-instrument and Berkhun SDM60 Auto-instrument. Methods: K2EDTA and citrated blood samples were taken from 149 randomly selected outpatients. The ESR of blood samples in tubes containing K2EDTA was determined by iSed Alcor Auto-instrument whereas Berkhun SDM60 Auto-instrument was used to determine the ESR of blood samples in tubes containing citrate. Results: The mean ± SD ESR was 24.48 ± 23.10 mm/hr (95% CI for the mean was 20.54–28.02 mm/hr) for iSed Alcor Auto-instrument and 23.94 ± 17.24 mm/hr (95% CI for the mean was 21.15–26.73 mm/hr) for the Berkhun Auto-instrument. We found the mean difference between two methods as 0.336 mm/hr (95% CI for the mean was −2.06 to 1.39 mm/hr; P = 0.701). The obtained correlation coefficient was 0.90 (P = 0.0001). There was no evidence of systemic bias, equal to 0.3 mm/hr (limits of agreement, –20.6 to 21.2 mm/hr). Conclusion: iSed Alcor Auto-instrument and Berkhun SDM60 Auto-instrument might be used as alternative systems each other. However, it should be monitored carefully in especially high ESR (>50 mm/hr) results and the results should be checked according to the Westergren method. J Clin Exp Invest 2014; 5 (3): 371-375

Keywords

• Erythrocyte sedimentation rate, EDTA tube, citrate tube, Bland–Altman analyses

Eritrosit çökme hızının belirlenmesi için farklı iki yöntemin karşılaştırılması

Öz

Amaç: Eritrosit Sedimentasyon Hızı (ESR) birçok hastalığın takip edilmesinde kullanılabilir. Son yıllarda ESR\'yi direk olarak ağzı kapalı EDTA ve sitrat kan örneği tüplerinden ölçen kapalı otomatik sistemler geliştirilmiştir. Bu çalışmada iSed Alcor Oto-Cihazı ve Berkhun SDM60 Oto-Cihazlarının sonuçlarını karşılaştırmayı ve aralarındaki uyumu değerlendirmeyi amaçladık. Yöntemler: K2EDTA ile sitratlı kan örnekleri 149 adet rastgele seçilen günübirlik hastadan alındı. K2EDTA\'lı tüplere alınan kan örneklerinin ESR\'si iSed Alcor Auto-instrument ile tayin edilirken, sitrat içeren tüplere alınan kandan Berkhun SDM60 Auto-instrument ile tespit edildi. Bulgular: iSed Alcor Oto-cihazı için ortalama ± SD ESR 24,48 ± 23,10 mm/saat (20.54-28.02 mm/saat ortalama için %95 GA) iken bu değer Berkhun Oto-cihazı için 23,94 ± 17,24 mm/saat (21,15–26,73 mm/saat ortalama için %95 GA) idi. İki yöntem arasındaki ortalama farkı 0,336 mm/saat (−2,06 ila 1,39 mm/saat ortalama için %95 GA; P = 0,701). Elde edilen korelasyon katsayısı 0,90 (P = 0,0001) idi. Sistematik taraflılığa yönelik bir kanıt mevcut olmayıp 0,3 mm/saat değerine eşitti (uyum sınırları –20,6 ila 21,2 mm/saat). Sonuç: iSed Alcor Oto-cihazı ile Berkhun SDM60 Oto-cihazı birbirlerine karşı alternatif sistemler olarak kullanılabilir. Ancak özellikle yüksek ESR (>50 mm/hr) sonuçlarında dikkatli bir şekilde takip edilmeli ve sonuçlar ise Westergren yöntemine göre kontrol edilmelidir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Eritrosit sedimentasyon hızı, EDTAlı tüp, sitratlı tüp, Bland–Altman analizi

References

1. Curvers J, Kooren J, Laan M, et al. Evaluation of the Ves-Matic Cube 200 erythrocyte sedimentation meth- od: comparison with Westergren-based methods. Am J Clin Pathol 2010;134:653-660.
2. Tinetti ME, Schmidt A, Baum J. Use of the erythrocyte sedimentation rate in chronically ill, elderly patients with a decline in health status. Am J Med 1986;80:844- 848.
3. Erikssen G, Liestol K, Bjornholt JV, et al. Erythrocyte sedimentation rate: a possible marker of atheroscle- rosis and a strong predictor of coronary heart disease mortality. Eur Heart J 2000;21:1614-1620.
4. Toklu GD, Akağaç AE, Ağca H. Brusellozda spesifik ol- mayan laboratuvar testlerinin tanıdaki önemi. J Clin Exp Invest 2012;3:87-90.
5. Bottiger LE, Svedberg CA. Normal erythrocyte sedi- mentation rate and age. Br Med J 1967; 2:85-87.
6. Brigden ML. Clinical utility of the erythrocyte sedimen- tation rate. Am Fam Physician 1999;60:1443-1450.
7. Miller A, Green M, Robinson D. Simple rule for calculat- ing normal erythrocyte sedimentation rate. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1983;286:266.
8. Sezer S, Yilmaz FM, Kaya O, et al. Evaluation of Ves- Matic Cube 200 for erythrocyte sedimentation rate de- termination. J Clin Lab Anal 2013;27:367-372.

9. Westergren A. The technique of the red cell sedimenta- tion reaction. Am Rev Tuberc 1926;14:94-100.
10. Westergren A. Studies of the suspension stability of the blood in pulmonary tuberculosis. Acta Med Scand 1921;54:247-282.
11. Koçar İH, Erikçi S, Ünübol ME. Eritrosit sedimenta- syon hizi ve klinik değeri. Turkiye Klinikleri J Med Sci 1989;9:174-181.
12. Akalin N, Arikan S, Turkeli N, et al. The comparison of different automation systems with reference method for erytrocyte sedimentation rate measurement. Türk Klinik Biyokimya Derg 2004;2:77-82.
13. AlFadhli SM, Al-Awadhi AM. Comparison of erythro- cyte sedimentation rate measurement by the automat- ed SEDIsystem and conventional Westergren method using the Bland and Altman statistical method. Med Princ Pract 2005;14:241-244.
14. Horsti J, Rontu R, Collings A. A Comparison Between the StaRRsed Auto-Compact Erythrocyte Sedimenta- tion Rate Instrument and the Westergren Method. J Clin Med Res 2010;2:261-265.
15. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assess- ing agreement between two methods of clinical mea- surement. Lancet 1986;1:307-310.
16. Choi JW, Pai SH. Influences of hypercholesterolemia on red cell indices and erythrocyte sedimentation rate in elderly persons. Clin Chim Acta 2004;341:117-121.
17. Miao G. Reference values of erythrocyte sedimen- tation rate of adult healthy subjects. Arch Med Res 2002;33:506-509.
18. Aletaha D, Neogi T, Silman AJ, et al. 2010 Rheuma- toid arthritis classification criteria: an American Col- lege of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism collaborative initiative. Arthritis Rheum 2010;62:2569-2581.
19. Cantini F, Salvarani C, Olivieri I, et al. Erythrocyte sed- imentation rate and C-reactive protein in the evalu- ation of disease activity and severity in polymyalgia rheumatica: a prospective follow-up study. Semin Ar- thritis Rheum 2000;30:17-24.
20. Hazleman B. Laboratory investigations useful in the evaluation of polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR) and giant cell arteritis (GCA). Clin Exp Rheumatol 2000;18:S29- 31.
21. Imafuku Y, Yoshida H, Greenfield S, et al. Automated measurement of erythrocyte sedimentation rate and its relation to red blood cell concentration and plasma proteins. Hematol Cell Ther 1998;40:27-32.
22. de Jonge N, Sewkaransing I, Slinger J, et al. Eryth- rocyte sedimentation rate by the test-1 analyzer. Clin Chem 2000;46:881-882.
23. Plebani M, De Toni S, Sanzari MC, et al. The TEST 1 automated system: a new method for measuring the erythrocyte sedimentation rate. Am J Clin Pathol 1998;110:334-340.
24. Hardeman MR, Levitus M, Pelliccia A, et al. Test 1 analyser for determination of ESR. 1. Practical evalu- ation and comparison with the Westergren technique. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 2010;70:21-25.
25. Cerutti H, Muzzi C, Leoncini R, et al. Erythrocyte sedi- mentation rate measurement by VES Matic Cube 80 in relation to inflammation plasma proteins. J Clin Lab Anal 2011;25:198-202.
26. Hardeman MR, Levitus M, Pelliccia A, et al. Test 1 analyser for determination of ESR. 2. Experimental evaluation and comparison with RBC aggregometry. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 2010;70:26-32.