CONTEXT: The hemoglobin (Hb) level is the most-used parameter for screening blood donors for the presence of anemia, one of the most-used methods for measuring Hb levels is based on photometric detection of cyanmetahemoglobin, as an alternative to this technology, HemoCue has developed a photometric method based on the determination of azide metahemoglobin. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the performance of three methods for hemoglobin (Hb) determination in a blood bank setting. DESIGN: Prospective study utilizing blood samples to compare methods for Hb determination. SETTING: Hemotherapy Service of the Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, a private institution in the tertiary health care system. SAMPLE: Serial blood samples were collected from 259 individuals during the period from March to June 1996. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: Test performances and their comparisons were assessed by the analysis of coefficients of variation (CV), linear regression and mean differences. RESULTS: The CV for the three methods were: Coulter 0.68%, Cobas 0.82% and HemoCue 0.69%. There was no difference between the mean Hb determination for the three methods (p>0.05). The Coulter and Cobas methods showed the best agreement and the HemoCue method gave a lower Hb determination when compared to both the Coulter and Cobas methods. However, pairs of methods involving the HemoCue seem to have narrower limits of agreement (± 0.78 and ± 1.02) than the Coulter and Cobas combination (± 1.13). CONCLUSION: The three methods provide good agreement for hemoglobin determination.
Classical serological screening assays for Chagas' disease are time consuming and subjective. The objective of the present work is to evaluate the enzyme immuno-assay (ELISA) methodology and to propose an algorithm for blood banks to be applied to Chagas' disease. Seven thousand, nine hundred and ninety nine blood donor samples were screened by both reverse passive hemagglutination (RPHA) and indirect immunofluorescence assay (IFA). Samples reactive on RPHA and/or IFA were submitted to supplementary RPHA, IFA and complement fixation (CFA) tests. This strategy allowed us to create a panel of 60 samples to evaluate the ELISA methodology from 3 different manufacturers. The sensitivity of the screening by IFA and the 3 different ELISA's was 100%. The specificity was better on ELISA methodology. For Chagas disease, ELISA seems to be the best test for blood donor screening, because it showed high sensitivity and specificity, it is not subjective and can be automated. Therefore, it was possible to propose an algorithm to screen samples and confirm donor results at the blood bank.
Os testes sorológicos clássicos utilizados na triagem de doadores de sangue são trabalhosos e subjetivos. O objetivo do presente trabalho é o de avaliar a metodologia imuno-enzimática (ELISA) e propor um algorítmo para doença de Chagas em bancos de sangue. Foram estudados 7999 doadores de sangue e/ou componentes cujas amostras foram testadas com o objetivo de tria-las sorologicamente para doença de Chagas utilizando hemaglutinação passiva reversa (RPHA) e imunofluorescência indireta (IFA). As amostras reativas em pelo menos uma destas metodologias, foram retestadas com reativos diferentes por RPHA, IFA e fixação de complemento (CFA). Esta estratégia nos permitiu criar um painel de 60 amostras com as quais tornou-se possível a avaliação do método imunoenzimático (ELISA). A sensibilidade da triagem dos doadores pelos métodos ELISA e IFA foi de 100%. A especificidade foi melhor para a metodologia imunoenzimática. O teste ELISA parece ser o ideal para triagem em bancos de sangue pois é altamente sensível, específico, não é subjetivo e pode ser automatizado. Desta forma, torna-se possível a formulação de um algorítimo a ser utilizado na triagem sorológica e confirmação de resultados em doadores de bancos de sangue
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.