Validation of a point-of-care capillary lactate measuring device (Lactate Pro 2)

Background The measurement of lactate in emergency medical services has the potential for earlier detection of shock and can be performed with a point-of-care handheld device. Validation of a point-of-care handheld device is required for prehospital implementation. Aim The primary aim was to validate the accuracy of Lactate Pro 2 in healthy volunteers and in haemodynamically compromised intensive care patients. The secondary aim was to evaluate which sample site, fingertip or earlobe, is most accurate compared to arterial lactate. Methods Arterial, venous and capillary blood samples from fingertips and earlobes were collected from intensive care patients and healthy volunteers. Arterial and venous blood lactate samples were analysed on a stationary hospital blood gas analyser (ABL800 Flex) as the reference device and compared to the Lactate Pro 2. We used the Bland-Altman method to calculate the limits of agreement and used mixed effect models to compare instruments and sample sites. A total of 49 intensive care patients with elevated lactate and 11 healthy volunteers with elevated lactate were included. Results There was no significant difference in measured lactate between Lactate Pro 2 and the reference method using arterial blood in either the healthy volunteers or the intensive care patients. Capillary lactate measurement in the fingertip and earlobe of intensive care patients was 47% (95% CI (29 to 68%), p < 0.001) and 27% (95% CI (11 to 45%), p < 0.001) higher, respectively, than the corresponding arterial blood lactate. In the healthy volunteers, we found that capillary blood lactate in the fingertip was 14% higher than arterial blood lactate (95% CI (4 to 24%), p = 0.003) and no significant difference between capillary blood lactate in the earlobe and arterial blood lactate. Conclusion Our results showed that the handheld Lactate Pro 2 had good agreement with the reference method using arterial blood in both intensive care patients and healthy volunteers. However, we found that the agreement was poorer using venous blood in both groups. Furthermore, the earlobe may be a better sample site than the fingertip in intensive care patients.publishedVersio

Validation of a point-of-care capillary lactate measuring device (Lactate Pro 2)

Background The measurement of lactate in emergency medical services has the potential for earlier detection of shock and can be performed with a point-of-care handheld device. Validation of a point-of-care handheld device is required for prehospital implementation. Aim The primary aim was to validate the accuracy of Lactate Pro 2 in healthy volunteers and in haemodynamically compromised intensive care patients. The secondary aim was to evaluate which sample site, fingertip or earlobe, is most accurate compared to arterial lactate. Methods Arterial, venous and capillary blood samples from fingertips and earlobes were collected from intensive care patients and healthy volunteers. Arterial and venous blood lactate samples were analysed on a stationary hospital blood gas analyser (ABL800 Flex) as the reference device and compared to the Lactate Pro 2. We used the Bland-Altman method to calculate the limits of agreement and used mixed effect models to compare instruments and sample sites. A total of 49 intensive care patients with elevated lactate and 11 healthy volunteers with elevated lactate were included. Results There was no significant difference in measured lactate between Lactate Pro 2 and the reference method using arterial blood in either the healthy volunteers or the intensive care patients. Capillary lactate measurement in the fingertip and earlobe of intensive care patients was 47% (95% CI (29 to 68%), p < 0.001) and 27% (95% CI (11 to 45%), p < 0.001) higher, respectively, than the corresponding arterial blood lactate. In the healthy volunteers, we found that capillary blood lactate in the fingertip was 14% higher than arterial blood lactate (95% CI (4 to 24%), p = 0.003) and no significant difference between capillary blood lactate in the earlobe and arterial blood lactate. Conclusion Our results showed that the handheld Lactate Pro 2 had good agreement with the reference method using arterial blood in both intensive care patients and healthy volunteers. However, we found that the agreement was poorer using venous blood in both groups. Furthermore, the earlobe may be a better sample site than the fingertip in intensive care patients