Non-Invasive Measurement of Hemoglobin: Assessment of Two Different Point-of-Care Technologies

Measurement of blood hemoglobin (Hb) concentration is a routine procedure. Using a non-invasive point-of-care device reduces pain and discomfort for the patient and allows time saving in patient care. The aims of the present study were to assess the concordance of Hb levels obtained non-invasively with the Pronto-7 monitor (version 2.1.9, Masimo Corporation, Irvine, USA) or with the NBM-200MP monitor (Orsense, Nes Ziona, Israel) and the values obtained from the usual colorimetric method using blood samples and to determine the source of discordance.We conducted two consecutive prospective open trials enrolling patients presenting in the emergency department of a university hospital. The first was designed to assess Pronto-7™ and the second NBM-200MP™. In each study, the main outcome measure was the agreement between both methods. Independent factors associated with the bias were determined using multiple linear regression. Three hundred patients were prospectively enrolled in each study. For Pronto-7™, the absolute mean difference was 0.56 g.L(-1) (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.41 to 0.69) with an upper agreement limit at 2.94 g.L(-1) (95% CI [2.70;3.19]), a lower agreement limit at -1.84 g.L(-1) (95% CI [-2.08;-1.58]) and an intra-class correlation coefficient at 0.80 (95% CI [0.74;0.84]). The corresponding values for the NBM-200MP™ were 0.21 [0.02;0.39], 3.42 [3.10;3.74], -3.01 [-3.32;-2.69] and 0.69 [0.62;0.75]. Multivariate analysis showed that age and laboratory values of hemoglobin were independently associated with the bias when using Pronto-7™, while perfusion index and laboratory value of hemoglobin were independently associated with the bias when using NBM-200MP™.Despite a relatively limited bias in both cases, the large limits of agreement found in both cases render the clinical usefulness of such devices debatable. For both devices, the bias is independently and inversely associated with the true value of hemoglobin.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01321580 and NCT01321593

Multicenter comparison of three intraoperative hemoglobin trend monitoring methods

Transfusion decisions are guided by clinical factors and measured hemoglobin (Hb). Time required for blood sampling and analysis may cause Hb measurement to lag clinical conditions, thus continuous intraoperative Hb trend monitoring may provide useful information. This multicenter study was designed to compare three methods of determining intraoperative Hb changes (trend accuracy) to laboratory determined Hb changes. Adult surgical patients with planned arterial catheterization were studied. With each blood gas analysis performed, pulse cooximetry hemoglobin (SpHb) was recorded, and arterial blood Hb was measured by hematology (tHb), arterial blood gas cooximetry (ABGHb), and point of care (aHQHb) analyzers. Hb change was calculated and trend accuracy assessed by modified Bland-Altman analysis. Secondary measures included Hb measurement change direction agreement. Trend accuracy mean bias (95% limits of agreement; g/dl) for SpHb was 0.10 (- 1.14 to 1.35); for ABGHb was - 0.02 (- 1.06 to 1.02); and for aHQHb was 0.003 (- 0.95 to 0.95). Changes more than ± 0.5 g/dl agreed with tHb changes more than ± 0.25 g/dl in 94.2% (88.9-97.0%) SpHb changes, 98.9% (96.1-99.7%) ABGHb changes and 99.0% (96.4-99.7%) aHQHb changes. Sequential changes in SpHb, ABGHb and aHQHb exceeding ± 0.5 g/dl have similar agreement to the direction but not necessarily the magnitude of sequential tHb change. While Hb blood tests should continue to be used to inform transfusion decisions, intraoperative continuous noninvasive SpHb decreases more than - 0.5 g/dl could be a good indicator of the need to measure tHb