Volume 43, Issue 5 pp. 1191-1197
ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Performance evaluation of coaguchek pro II in comparison with coaguchek XS plus and sta-r Max using a sta-neoplastine CI plus

Minjeong Nam

Minjeong Nam

Department of Laboratory Medicine, Konkuk University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

Search for more papers by this author
Mina Hur

Corresponding Author

Mina Hur

Department of Laboratory Medicine, Konkuk University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

Correspondence

Mina Hur, Department of Laboratory Medicine, Konkuk University School of Medicine, Konkuk University Medical Center, 120-1, Neungdong-ro, Hwayang-dong, Gwangjin-gu, Seoul 05030, Korea.

Email: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author
Hanah Kim

Hanah Kim

Department of Laboratory Medicine, Konkuk University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

Search for more papers by this author
Sumi Yoon

Sumi Yoon

Department of Laboratory Medicine, Chung-Ang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

Search for more papers by this author
Seungho Lee

Seungho Lee

Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Korea

Search for more papers by this author
Seonhyeon Shin

Seonhyeon Shin

Department of Laboratory Medicine, Konkuk University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

Search for more papers by this author
Hee-Won Moon

Hee-Won Moon

Department of Laboratory Medicine, Konkuk University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

Search for more papers by this author
Yeo-Min Yun

Yeo-Min Yun

Department of Laboratory Medicine, Konkuk University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 18 January 2021
Citations: 5

Abstract

Introduction

We evaluated the analytical performance of CoaguChek Pro II (Roche Diagnostics GmbH, Mannheim, Germany), a new point-of-care device measuring the international normalized ratio (INR) values, in comparison with CoaguChek XS Plus (Roche Diagnostics GmbH) and STA-R Max using STA-Neoplastine CI Plus (Diagnostica Stago SAS, Asnières-sur-Seine, France).

Methods

The precision of Pro II was analyzed, according to the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute guidelines (CLSI POCT14-A2 and EP15-A3). In 105 clinical samples, the Pro II INR values were compared with those of XS Plus and STA-R Max using STA-Neoplastine CI Plus (CLSI EP09-A3 and EP35). We also compared the Pro II INR values between capillary blood (CB) and venous blood (VB; CLSI EP35).

Results

The precision of Pro II was acceptable (within-run and between-run CV%: 2.71% and 3.28% at normal level; 1.52% and 4.47% at abnormal level, respectively). The Pro II INR values showed very high correlation and almost perfect agreement with those of XS Plus and STA-R Max using STA-Neoplastine CI Plus (r = .97 and κ = .94; r = .95 and κ = .91). The mean difference between Pro II and STA-R Max using STA-Neoplastine CI Plus increased as INR values increased, with 60% of samples showing differences >0.5 in the supratherapeutic range. The Pro II INR values showed very high correlation between CB and VB (r = .98).

Conclusion

Pro II INR values are accurate and reliable using both CB and VB; however, they should be confirmed by laboratory analyzers in the supratherapeutic range.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of the paper.

DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.