Howard J Dworkin1, Mary Premo, Stuart Dees. 1. Department of Nuclear Medicine, William Beaumont Hospital, Royal Oak, Michigan 48073-6769, USA. hdworkin@beaumont.edu
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Our facility's current blood volume measurement protocol has involved separate measurement of plasma and red cell volumes. The purpose of this study is to determine whether measurement with a recently FDA-approved, one-compartment semiautomated system provides similar accuracy. METHODS: Blood volume measurement was performed on 27 volunteers using our current protocol followed immediately by semiautomated plasma volume measurement and red cell volume calculation with a recently available system (BVA-100). RESULTS: Double labeling for red cell mass and plasma volume required approximately 5 hours of technologist and processing time; measurement with the BVA-100 required approximately 1.5 hours or less, a saving of 3.5 hours time per test. Whole blood and red cell volume each exhibited a Pearson correlation of 0.96, and plasma volume exhibited a Spearman rank correlation of 0.90. Average percent difference between the measurement methods was 2.2% for whole blood volume, 0.9% for red cell volume, and 3.3% for plasma volume. The mean ratio between the mean body hematocrit and measured venous hematocrit (f ratio) was 0.91, with a standard deviation of 0.0405. CONCLUSIONS: The BVA-100 has significant advantages in terms of time and ease of use. The 2 tests can be considered equivalent methods for blood volume measurements.
BACKGROUND: Our facility's current blood volume measurement protocol has involved separate measurement of plasma and red cell volumes. The purpose of this study is to determine whether measurement with a recently FDA-approved, one-compartment semiautomated system provides similar accuracy. METHODS: Blood volume measurement was performed on 27 volunteers using our current protocol followed immediately by semiautomated plasma volume measurement and red cell volume calculation with a recently available system (BVA-100). RESULTS: Double labeling for red cell mass and plasma volume required approximately 5 hours of technologist and processing time; measurement with the BVA-100 required approximately 1.5 hours or less, a saving of 3.5 hours time per test. Whole blood and red cell volume each exhibited a Pearson correlation of 0.96, and plasma volume exhibited a Spearman rank correlation of 0.90. Average percent difference between the measurement methods was 2.2% for whole blood volume, 0.9% for red cell volume, and 3.3% for plasma volume. The mean ratio between the mean body hematocrit and measured venous hematocrit (f ratio) was 0.91, with a standard deviation of 0.0405. CONCLUSIONS: The BVA-100 has significant advantages in terms of time and ease of use. The 2 tests can be considered equivalent methods for blood volume measurements.
Authors: Vladimir Drozdovitch; Aaron B Brill; Ronald J Callahan; Jeffrey A Clanton; Allegra DePietro; Stanley J Goldsmith; Bennett S Greenspan; Milton D Gross; Marguerite T Hays; Stephen C Moore; James A Ponto; Walton W Shreeve; Dunstana R Melo; Martha S Linet; Steven L Simon Journal: Health Phys Date: 2015-05 Impact factor: 1.316
Authors: Theodore R Hobbs; Steven W Blue; Byung S Park; Jennifer J Greisel; P Michael Conn; Francis K-Y Pau Journal: J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci Date: 2015-11 Impact factor: 1.232