Li-Hep vs. Non-Li-Hep Coated Transfer Device

Summary

Participation Requirements

Description

In September 2019, the validation study 1.0 started, in which the cTnI result of the Siemens POC device on three sample types are compared. Interim analysis of the sample comparison was performed by regression analysis using Passing and Bablock, and calculating the Pearson correlation coefficient. T...

In September 2019, the validation study 1.0 started, in which the cTnI result of the Siemens POC device on three sample types are compared. Interim analysis of the sample comparison was performed by regression analysis using Passing and Bablock, and calculating the Pearson correlation coefficient. The Li-hep Plasma vs Li-hep venous blood show a very good correlation of 1.00-1.03 with an R of >0.99, so the results between these sample types can be used interchangeably. For the capillary sample vs the Li-hep sample (both blood and plasma) the slope is 8-12% higher. With a 8-12% higher response, the capillary test results may not be interchangeably used with the other 2 sample types. It is remarkable that capillary samples give a higher response, since it was anticipated that the result may be slightly lower due to the possible dilution by interstitial fluid. The investigators hypothesize that the presence of the Li-heparin anti-coagulant in the venous draw lead to a slight reduction of the apparent cTnI concentration. By using a heparin coated transfer device for the capillary samples instead of an uncoated transfer device, this hypothesis will be tested.

Tracking Information