Abstract
Background: With the use of a traditional blood gas analyzer (BGA) (ABL800 Radiometer) for blood glucose monitoring, tight glucose control (TGC) reduced in-hospital mortality and morbidity of surgical intensive care unit (ICU) adult and pediatric patients. Such BGAs are now superseded by cassette-based BGAs. We assessed the analytical reliability of cassette-based BGAs to monitor patient’s metabolic status in an ICU setting.
Methods: We evaluated recovery/linearity, imprecision/repeatability and relative accuracy vs. comparison methods for glucose [coupled hexokinase glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (HK/G6PD) assay] and lactate (lactate dehydrogenase assay) in ICU patient samples with two cassette-based BGAs [RP500 (Siemens) and ABL90 (Radiometer)] and with the ABL800 BGA.
Results: Recovery of spiked glucose up to 348 mg/dL (19.3 mmol/L) was complete for all BGAs. Repeatability of ABL800 and ABL90 was comparable with the comparison method (about 1%), but higher for RP500 (about 2.4%). All BGAs were in agreement with the comparison method, with all glucose measurements falling within preset 10% criteria suggested by Karon. Recovery of spiked lactate (up to 25 mmol/L) was incomplete at all levels. Repeatability of ABL800 and ABL90 was comparable with the comparison method (about 4%), and 5.5% for RP500. All BGAs were in agreement with the comparison method, with >98% of the lactate measurements falling within 30% biological-variation-based criteria.
Conclusions: The cassette-based BGAs quantified blood glucose and lactate levels in ICU patients within the acceptable error ranges. Cassette-based BGAs can be used for monitoring patient’s metabolic status in an ICU setting.
Conflict of interest statement
Authors’ conflict of interest disclosure: The authors stated that there are no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this article. Research funding played no role in the study design; in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; or in the decision to submit the report for publication.
Research funding: The manufacturers provided BGAs and consumables free of charge (Radiometer Benelux, Zoetermeer, The Netherlands; Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics, Anderlecht, Belgium). All experiments and the preparation of this report were conducted without interference by the manufacturers.
Employment or leadership: K.P. received travel grants from Radiometer and Siemens companies. Other authors declare to have no conflicts of interest.
Honorarium: None declared.
References
1. Van den Berghe G, Wouters P, Weekers F, Verwaest C, Bruyninckx F, Schetz M, et al. Intensive insulin therapy in critically ill patients. N Engl J Med 2001;345:1359–67.10.1056/NEJMoa011300Search in Google Scholar
2. Vlasselaers D, Milants I, Desmet L, Wouters PJ, Vanhorebeek I, van den Heuvel I, et al. Intensive insulin therapy for patients in paediatric intensive care: a prospective, randomised controlled study. Lancet 2009;373:547–56.10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60044-1Search in Google Scholar
3. Van den Berghe G, Schetz M, Vlasselaers D, Hermans G, Wilmer A, Bouillon R, et al. Clinical review: intensive insulin therapy in critically ill patients: NICE-SUGAR or Leuven blood glucose target? J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2009;94:3163–70.10.1210/jc.2009-0663Search in Google Scholar
4. Agus MS, Steil GM, Wypij D, Costello JM, Laussen PC, Langer M, et al. Tight glycemic control versus standard care after pediatric cardiac surgery. N Engl J Med 2012;367:1208–19.10.1056/NEJMoa1206044Search in Google Scholar
5. Hirsch IB. Understanding low sugar from NICE-SUGAR. N Engl J Med 2012;367:1150–2.10.1056/NEJMe1208208Search in Google Scholar
6. Wiener RS, Wiener DC, Larson RJ. Benefits and risks of tight glucose control in critically ill adults: a meta-analysis. JAMA 2008;300:933–44.10.1001/jama.300.8.933Search in Google Scholar
7. Scott MG, Bruns DE, Boyd JC, Sacks DB. Tight glucose control in the intensive care unit: are glucose meters up to the task? Clin Chem 2009;55:18–20.10.1373/clinchem.2008.117291Search in Google Scholar
8. Kimberly MM, Vesper HW, Caudill SP, Ethridge SF, Archibold E, Porter KH, et al. Variability among five over-the-counter blood glucose monitors. Clin Chim Acta 2006;364:292–7.10.1016/j.cca.2005.07.027Search in Google Scholar
9. Boyd JC, Bruns DE. Quality specifications for glucose meters: assessment by simulation modeling of errors in insulin dose. Clin Chem 2001;47:209–14.10.1093/clinchem/47.2.209Search in Google Scholar
10. Boyd JC, Bruns DE. Monte Carlo simulation in establishing analytical quality requirements for clinical laboratory tests: meeting clinical needs. Methods Enzymol 2009;467:411–33.10.1016/S0076-6879(09)67016-6Search in Google Scholar
11. Neese JW, Duncan P, Bayse D, Robinson M, Cooper T, Stewart C. Development and evaluation of a hexokinase/glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase procedure for use as a national glucose comparison method. HEW Publication No. (CDC) 77-8330. Atlanta: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1976.Search in Google Scholar
12. Kunst A, Draeger B, Ziegenhorn J. UV-methods with hexokinase and glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase. In: Bergmeyer HU, Bergmeyer J, Grassl M, editors. Methods of enzymatic analysis: Volume VI: Metabolites 1: Carbohydrates. Weinheim-Deerfield Beach-Basel: Verlag Chemie, 1981:164.Search in Google Scholar
13. Pelletier O, Arratoon C. Precision of glucose measurements in control sera by isotope dilution/mass spectrometry: proposed definitive method compared with a comparison method. Clin Chem 1987;33:1397–402.10.1093/clinchem/33.8.1397Search in Google Scholar
14. Noll F. L-(+)-lactate. In: Bergmeyer HU, Bergmeyer J, Grassl M, editors. Methods of enzymatic analysis: Volume VI: Metabolites 1: Carbohydrates. Weinheim-Deerfield Beach-Basel: Verlag Chemie, 1981:583.Search in Google Scholar
15. Marbach EP, Weil MH. Rapid enzymatic measurement of blood lactate and pyruvate. Use and significance of metaphosphoric acid as a common precipitant. Clin Chem 1967;13:314–25.Search in Google Scholar
16. Landt M. Glyceraldehyde preserves glucose concentrations in whole blood specimens. Clin Chem 2000;46:1144–9.10.1093/clinchem/46.8.1144Search in Google Scholar
17. Krebs HA, Henseleit K. Untersuchungen über die Harnstoffbildung im Tierkörper. Hoppe-Seyler’s Zeitschrift für Physiol Chemie 1932;210:33–66.10.1515/bchm2.1932.210.1-2.33Search in Google Scholar
18. Wahl HG. How accurately do we measure blood glucose levels in intensive care unit (ICU) patients? Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol 2009;23:387–400.10.1016/j.bpa.2009.09.003Search in Google Scholar PubMed
19. Wahl P, Zinner C, Zengyuan Y, Bloch W, Mester J. Warming-up affects performance and lactate distribution between plasma and red blood cells. J Sports Sci Med 2010;9:499–507.Search in Google Scholar
20. De Pinieux G, Chariot P, Ammi-Saïd M, Louarn F, Lejonc JL, Astier A, et al. Lipid-lowering drugs and mitochondrial function: effects of HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors on serum ubiquinone and blood lactate/pyruvate ratio. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1996;42:333–7.10.1046/j.1365-2125.1996.04178.xSearch in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
21. D’Orazio P, Burnett RW, Fogh-Andersen N, Jacobs E, Kuwa K, Külpmann WR, et al. Approved IFCC recommendation on reporting results for blood glucose. International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine Scientific Division. Working Group on Selective Electrodes and Point-of-Care Testing Approved IFCC recommendation on reporting results for blood glucose: International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine Scientific Division, Working Group on Selective Electrodes and Point-of-Care Testing (IFCC-SD-WG-SEPOCT). Clin Chem Lab Med 2006;44:1486–90.10.1515/CCLM.2006.275Search in Google Scholar PubMed
22. Swaminathan R, Cockram CS. Effectiveness of sodium fluoride as a preservative of glucose in blood. Clin Chem 1989;35:315–7.10.1093/clinchem/35.2.315Search in Google Scholar
23. Seeley ES, Bowen R, Faix JD. Rapid blood separation is superior to fluoride for preventing in vitro reductions in measured blood glucose concentration. J Clin Pathol 2009;62:752–3.10.1136/jcp.2008.062547Search in Google Scholar PubMed
24. NCCLS. Evaluation of the linearity of quantitative measurement procedure: a statistical approach; approved guideline. NCCLS document EP6-A. Wayne, PA: NCCLS, 2003.Search in Google Scholar
25. NCCLS. Evaluation of the precision performance of quantitative measurement methods: approved guideline, 2nd ed. NCCLS document EP5-A2. Wayne, PA: NCCLS, 2004.Search in Google Scholar
26. Lentner C, editor. Scientific tables, 8th ed. Basel: Geigy-Ciba, 1981.Search in Google Scholar
27. Davis RB, Thompson JE, Pardue HL. Characteristics of statistical parameters used to interpret least-squares results. Clin Chem 1978;24:611–20.10.1093/clinchem/24.4.611Search in Google Scholar
28. Draper N, Smith H. Applied regression analysis, 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley and sons, 1981.Search in Google Scholar
29. Deming WE. Statistical adjustment of data. New York: John Wiley and sons, 1943. (republished in 1985 by Dover Publications Inc., New York).Search in Google Scholar
30. Karon BS, Boyd JC, Klee GG. Glucose meter performance criteria for tight glycemic control estimated by simulation modeling. Clin Chem 2010;56:1091–7.10.1373/clinchem.2010.145367Search in Google Scholar PubMed
31. Ricos C, Alvarez V, Cava F, Garcia-Lario JV, Hernandez A, Jimenez CV, et al. Current databases on biologic variation: pros, cons and progress. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 1999;59:491–500.10.1080/00365519950185229Search in Google Scholar PubMed
32. Van den Berghe G, Wouters PJ, Bouillon R, Weekers F, Verwaest C, Schetz M, et al. Outcome benefit of intensive insulin therapy in the critically ill: insulin dose versus glycemic control. Crit Care Med 2003;31:359–66.10.1097/01.CCM.0000045568.12881.10Search in Google Scholar PubMed
33. De Koninck AS, De Decker K, Van Bocxlaer J, Meeus P, Van Hoovels L. Analytical performance evaluation of four cartridge-type blood gas analyzers. Clin Chem Lab Med 2012;50:1083–91.10.1515/cclm-2011-0685Search in Google Scholar PubMed
34. The Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia (RCPA). Chemical pathology quality assurance program. Available from: http://www.rcpaqap.com.au/chempath/gendocs/uploadedfiles/Allowable-Limits.pdf. Accessed 25 January, 2013.Search in Google Scholar
35. Slater-MacLean L, Cembrowski G, Chin D, Shalapay C, Binette T, Hegadoren K, et al. Accuracy of glycemic measurements in the critically ill. Diabetes Technol Ther 2008;10:169–77.10.1089/dia.2008.0263Search in Google Scholar PubMed
36. Vlasselaers D, Herpe TV, Milants I, Eerdekens M, Wouters PJ, Moor BD, et al. Blood glucose measurements in arterial blood of intensive care unit patients submitted to tight glycemic control: agreement between bedside tests. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2008;2:932–8.10.1177/193229680800200603Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
37. Atkin SH, Dasmahapatra A, Jaker MA, Chorost MI, Reddy S. Fingerstick glucose determination in shock. Ann Intern Med 1991;114:1020–4.10.7326/0003-4819-114-12-1020Search in Google Scholar PubMed
38. Haupt A, Berg B, Paschen P, Dreyer M, Haring HU, Smedegaard J, et al. The effects of skin temperature and testing site on blood glucose measurements taken by a modern blood glucose monitoring device. Diabetes Technol Ther 2005;7:597–601.10.1089/dia.2005.7.597Search in Google Scholar PubMed
39. US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Review criteria assessment of portable blood glucose monitoring in vitro diagnostic devices using glucose oxidase, dehydrogenase or hexokinase methodology. Available from: http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/GuidanceDocuments/ucm094134.htm. Accessed 25 January, 2013.Search in Google Scholar
40. Karon BS, Scott R, Burritt MF, Santrach PJ. Comparison of lactate values between point-of-care and central laboratory analyzers. Am J Clin Pathol 2007;128:168–71.10.1309/HBQEFDPH34MKK5GPSearch in Google Scholar PubMed
©2013 by Walter de Gruyter Berlin Boston
