These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Comparison of a two-step Tempus600 hub solution single-tube vs. container-based, one-step pneumatic transport system.
    Author: Luginbühl M, Frey K, Gawinecka J, von Eckardstein A, Saleh L.
    Journal: Clin Chem Lab Med; 2024 Oct 28; 62(11):2215-2222. PubMed ID: 38742247.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVES: Efficient and timely transportation of clinical samples is pivotal to ensure accurate diagnoses and effective patient care. During the transportation process, preservation of sample integrity is crucial to avoid pre-analytical aberrations on laboratory results. Here, we present a comparative analysis between a two-step Tempus600 hub solution single-tube and a one-step, container-based pneumatic transport system (PTS) from Airco, for the in-house transportation of blood samples. METHODS: Ten blood samples from healthy volunteers were split in 10 mL collection tubes filled at full or half capacity for transportation with the two PTS (about 250 m). To compare the impact of transportation, markers of hemolysis such as lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), potassium (K+), and the hemolysis index (HI), were determined. Additionally, differences in HI in routine samples and repeated transportation was investigated. To assess and compare the mechanistic impact profiles, we recorded the acceleration profiles of the two PTS using a shock data logger. RESULTS: Transportation using the Tempus600 hub solution resulted in 49 and 46 % higher HI with samples filled to total or half capacity, respectively. Routine samples transported with the Tempus600 hub solution showed a higher median HI by 23 and 33 %. Additionally, shock logger analysis showed an elevated amount of shocks (6.5 fold) and shock intensities (1.8 fold). CONCLUSIONS: The Tempus600 hub solution caused an increased number of unreportable LDH or K+ results based on the hemolysis index. However, it was only statistically significant for LDH (p<0.01 and p<0.08) - while the comparisons for K+ were not statistically significant (p<0.28 and p<0.56).
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]