GEM 3000与雅培I-STAT血气分析仪结果比对分析

Comparison analysis of GEM 3000 and Abbott I-STAT blood gas analyzers

目的确保相同标本在不同的血气分析仪上的检测结果具有可比性,对医院使用GEM Premier3000血气分析仪(简称GEM 3000)与雅培I-STAT血气分析仪(简称雅培I-STAT)进行比较,保证使用于临床的血气分析仪能正确反映病人的血气情况。方法 22台血气分析仪,其中雅培I-STAT 11台,GEM 3000 11台。采用相同的血气质控物对两款血气分析仪进行检测,以美国CLIA’88为标准对参加比对的仪器进行评价,并与检验科参加过全国卫生和计划生育委员会室间质评的血气分析仪进行比对,计算两种型号血气分析仪之间的偏倚。结果发现胸心外科1台GEM 3000的氧分压在2号和3号标本中检测结果偏高(分别是113 mm Hg、172 mm Hg),超过了允许的最大范围,比对不符合要求。对不符合比对要求的血气分析仪进行校准并再次比对,合格后给予临床使用。结论临床检测中尽量使用相同型号的血气分析仪,若型号不同,应定期进行比对,保证结果具有可比性。

Objective To compare 2 kinds of blood gas analyzers GEM Premier3000（GEM3000） and Abbott I-STAT for test- ing comparability of results with same samples, and ensure analyzers qualified eventually for blood gas analysis in clinic. Methods Two kinds of 22 blood gas analyzers were enrolled, which included 11 Abbott I-STAT and 11 GEM 3000. The two kinds of blood gas analyzers were tested with same blood quality control material and evaluated by standard of American CLI- A＇88. Then compared with blood gas analyzer which was approved by external quality assessment of department of clinical laboratories by National Health and Family Planning Commission, and the bias of 2 kinds of blood gas analyzers were calcu- lated. Results The PO2 test results of No.2（113 mmHg） and No.3（172 mmHg） samples from GEM 3000 analyzer at Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery were higher than maximum range and imcompatible. The analyzers which failed to meet the require- ments then proceeded with calibration and alignment before using in clinic. Conclusion It is demonstrated that same type of blood gas analyzer should be used in clinical test if possible, and regularly comparison of different type of blood gas analyzers should be carried out to ensure comparability of results.