IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0211104.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of two portable clinical analyzers to one stationary analyzer for the determination of blood gas partial pressures and blood electrolyte concentrations in horses

Author

Listed:
  • Katharina Kirsch
  • Johann Detilleux
  • Didier Serteyn
  • Charlotte Sandersen

Abstract

Portable blood gas analyzers are used to facilitate diagnosis and treatment of disorders related to disturbances of acid-base and electrolyte balance in the ambulatory care of equine patients. The aim of this study was to determine whether 2 portable analyzers produce results in agreement with a stationary analyzer. Blood samples from 23 horses hospitalized for various medical reasons were included in this prospective study. Blood gas analysis and electrolyte concentrations measured by the portable analyzers VetStat and epoc were compared to those produced by the cobas b 123 analyzer via concordance analysis, Passing-Bablok regression and Bland-Altman analysis. Limits of agreement indicated relevant bias between the VetStat and cobas b 123 for partial pressure of oxygen (pO2; 27.5–33.8 mmHg), sodium ([Na+]; 4.3–21.6 mmol/L) and chloride concentration ([Cl-]; 0.3–7.9 mmol/L) and between the epoc and cobas b 123 for pH (0.070–0.022), partial pressure of carbon dioxide (pCO2; 3.6–7.3 mmHg), pO2 (36.2–32.7 mmHg) and [Na+] (0.38.1 mmol/L). The VetStat analyzer yielded results that were in agreement with the cobas b 123 analyzer for determination of pH, pCO2, bicarbonate ([HCO3-]) and potassium concentration [K+], while the epoc analyzer achieved acceptable agreement for [HCO3-] and [K+]. The VetStat analyzer may be useful in performing blood gas analysis in equine samples but analysis of [Na+], [Cl-] and pO2 should be interpreted with caution. The epoc delivered reliable results for [HCO3-] and [K+], while results for pH, pCO2, pO2 and [Na+] should be interpreted with caution.

Suggested Citation

  • Katharina Kirsch & Johann Detilleux & Didier Serteyn & Charlotte Sandersen, 2019. "Comparison of two portable clinical analyzers to one stationary analyzer for the determination of blood gas partial pressures and blood electrolyte concentrations in horses," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(2), pages 1-14, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0211104
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0211104
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0211104
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0211104&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0211104?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0211104. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.