An Alternative Method for Adrenal Venous Sampling in Cases in Which Right Adrenal Vein Sampling is Difficult

PurposeCatheterization of the right adrenal vein (rt.AdV) to obtain blood samples can often be difficult. The aim of the present study was to investigate whether blood sampling from the inferior vena cava (IVC) at its juncture with the rt.AdV can be an alternative to sampling of blood directly from the rt.AdV.Materials and MethodsThis study included 44 patients diagnosed with primary aldosteronism (PA) in whom AVS with adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) was performed, resulting in a diagnosis of idiopathic hyperaldosteronism (IHA) (n=24), and patients diagnosed with unilateral aldosterone-producing adenoma (APA) (n=20; rt.APA=8, lt.APA=12). In addition to regular blood sampling, blood was also sampled from the IVC, as the substitute rt.AdV [S-rt.AdV]. Diagnostic performance with the conventional lateralized index (LI) and the modified LI using the S-rt.AdV was compared to examine the utility of the modified LI.ResultsThe modified LI of the rt.APA (0.4±0.4) was significantly lower than those of the IHA (1.4±0.7) (p<0.001) and the lt.APA (3.5±2.0) (p<0.001). The modified LI of the lt.APA was significantly higher than those of the IHA (p<0.001) and rt.APA (p<0.001). Sensitivity and specificity to diagnose rt.APA and lt.APA using the modified LI with threshold values of 0.7 and 2.2, respectively, they were 87% and 75%, respectively, and 94% and 94%, respectively.ConclusionThe modified LI has the potential to be an alternative method for rt.AdV sampling in cases in which rt.AdV sampling is difficult. Obtaining the modified LI is extremely simple, which might complement conventional AVS.

Improving the Quality of EDTA-treated Blood Specimens from Mice

Nonterminal blood sampling in laboratory mice is a very common procedure. With the goal of improving animal welfare, different sampling sites and methods have been compared but have not achieved a consensus. Moreover, most of these studies overlooked the quality of blood specimens collected. The main preanalytical concern with EDTA-treated blood specimens for hematology analyses is platelet aggregation, which is known to cause analytical errors. Our objective was to find a nonterminal blood sampling method with minimal adverse effects on mice and few or no platelet aggregates. We tested and compared 2 collection sites, 4 sampling methods, and 3 antithrombotic drugs in 80 C57BL6/j male and female mice by evaluating platelet aggregates on blood smears and platelet, WBC, and RBC counts. In addition, the blood collection process was carefully evaluated, and adverse effects were recorded. Platelet aggregation was lower in specimens collected from the jugular vein than from the facial vein, with no effect of the sampling device or the presence of an antithrombotic additive. Highly aggregated specimens were significantly associated with lower platelet counts, whereas aggregation had no effect on WBC or RBC counts. Adverse events during sampling were significantly associated with more numerous platelet aggregates. The jugular vein is thus a satisfactory sampling site in mice in terms of both animal welfare and low platelet aggregation. Using antithrombotic agents appears to be unnecessary, whereas improving sampling conditions remains a key requirement to ensure the quality of EDTA-treated blood specimens from mice.

Comparison of the effects of open-tube and evacuated tube–assisted sampling methods on thromboelastography variables for blood samples from healthy dogs

OBJECTIVE To compare the effects of open-tube blood sampling with previously investigated blood sampling methods via evacuated tube on thromboelastography variables for blood samples from dogs. ANIMALS 10 healthy Beagles from the research colony owned by the Clinic of Small Animal Internal Medicine, University Veterinary of Medicine, Vienna, were used. PROCEDURES In this prospective study, blood was sampled from each dog serially into citrate solution–containing tubes via 20-gauge needle. One evacuated tube was filled from a jugular vein via the evacuated tube port, and the second tube was opened and filled by catching blood flowing through the needle from a lateral saphenous vein. Venipuncture quality was scored with a previously described method. Thromboelastography was performed for each sample. RESULTS Inferential statistics used with the Wilcoxon signed rank test showed significant differences in reaction time (R) of 3.43 ± 0.84 minutes versus 4.53 ± 0.62 minutes (mean ± SD) between evacuated tube assisted and open-tube sampling, respectively. No other significant differences were identified. CLINICAL RELEVANCE The sampling methods compared have a small but significant effect on R in thromboelastographic analysis for blood samples from healthy dogs. Shear stress by vacuum sampling seems to accelerate coagulation in jugular blood samples harvested by evacuated tube, resulting in a shortened R. Results suggested that the open-tube method avoids shear stress induced activation of coagulation and is an appropriate sampling method for thromboelastography when used within a standardized protocol.

Proficiency-based progression intern training to reduce critical blood sampling errors including ‘wrong blood in tube’

Background: Blood sampling errors including ‘wrong blood in tube’ (WBIT) may have adverse effects on clinical outcomes. WBIT errors occur when the blood sample in the tube is not that of the patient identified on the label. This study aims to determine the effect of proficiency-based progression (PBP) training in phlebotomy on the rate of blood sampling errors (including WBIT). Methods: A non-randomised controlled trial compared the blood sampling error rate of 43 historical controls who had not undergone PBP training in 2016 to 44 PBP trained interventional groups in 2017. In 2018, the PBP training programme was implemented and the blood sampling error rate of 46 interns was compared to the 43 historical controls in 2016. Data analysis was performed using logistic regression analysis adjusting for sample timing. Results: In 2016, 43 interns had a total blood sample error rate of 2.4%, compared to 44 interns in 2017, who had error rate of 1.2% (adjusted OR=0.50, 95% CI 0.36-0.70; <0.01). In 2018, 46 interns had an error rate of 1.9% (adjusted OR=0.89, 95% CI 0.65-1.21; p=0.46) when compared to the 2016 historical controls. There were three WBITs in 2016, three WBITs in 2017 and five WBITs in 2018. Conclusions: The study demonstrates that PBP training in phlebotomy has the potential to reduce blood sampling errors. Trial registration number: NCT03577561