Share this
overcoming hematocrit accuracy issues: VAMS vs. DBS
by Neoteryx on Mar 6, 2018 1:32:52 PM
Overcoming the hematocrit (HCT) effect has for years been a major challenge to widespread adoption of dried blood spot (DBS) sampling technology. Is there a way to overcome the hematocrit bias and get results on par with those generated from wet blood?
A breakthrough in medical technology, volumetric absorptive microsampling, improves the quality of healthcare for patients while cutting costs of blood sample handling and analysis. Drawing fixed volume blood samples of 20 microliters from a single finger prick is less invasive than venipuncture methods that extract blood volumes approximately one thousand times greater.
Hematocrit Accuracy in Dried Blood Spot Microsampling
Dried Blood Spot (DBS) sampling has been utilized for decades to assess the blood chemistry of infants whose blood supply will not support normal venipuncture sampling. A drop of blood drawn from the infant’s finger or heel is placed on a specially treated (Guthrie or Whitman) card for analysis. Similarly, a Mitra® device with the patented VAMS® tip is enabled by a finger-stick or heel-stick with a small lancet, and requires no refrigeration for storage and transport.
Lab analyses have shown that one critical variation exists in standard DBS evaluation: results of blood hematocrit levels, the volume of red blood cells as a percentage of the sample, can be misleading. With traditional DBS, blood is placed on a special card and allowed to spread. How far the blood sample spreads depends on the viscosity of the sample. If the blood spreads slowly, the viscosity is higher. If it spreads quickly, the blood is somewhat thinner.
The existing level of hematocrit analyzed in a sample may vary due to a patient’s body hydration level. Lower viscosity, more hydrated blood samples spread further across the dried blood paper. When the target blood sample area is punched from the sample card, the analysis tends to result in a lower percentage of red blood cells or hematocrit. Smaller, more viscous samples will show a comparatively higher hematocrit level.
As a solution, perforating the DBS cards had the effect of limiting the blood spreading by better defining the area the spot covers, resulting in a fixed volume and more accurate hematocrit level reading. The method is called “whole spot analysis, perforated, and precut.”
But the best was yet to come.
The VAMS Advantage
The VAMS method has emerged as the most promising solution yet to the problem of hematocrit bias in DBS sample collection. Using the Mitra device with a VAMS tip absorbs a precise volume of blood (20µ) without regard to the viscosity, within seconds. When the sample is dried, the remaining volume delivers an accurate hematocrit reading without the variability of DBS.
Also, microsamples do not require refrigeration or special handling and can be self-administered easily from remote locations. At the laboratory, sophisticated equipment and techniques can evaluate microsamples as accurately as a larger specimen.
If you haven't yet explored the advantages of the latest microsampling technology, you can do it now, for free.
Share this
- Alternative to Venipuncture (95)
- Clinical Trials (54)
- Capillary Blood Sampling (34)
- Remote Blood Collection (28)
- Alternative to Dried Blood Spot (27)
- research studies (24)
- Microsampling (22)
- Immunosuppressants (17)
- Coronavirus (16)
- RNA / DNA from Dried Blood (13)
- finger-stick microsampling (11)
- remote microsampling (11)
- therapeutic drug monitoring (10)
- COVID-19 (8)
- Viral Pathogens (8)
- remote microsampling study (8)
- Blood Collection At Home (7)
- remote specimen collection (7)
- SARS-CoV-2 (6)
- specimen collection (6)
- clinical research (5)
- Blood Sampling (4)
- Pharmacokinetics (4)
- Antibodies (3)
- anti-doping (3)
- anticancer (3)
- blood samples (3)
- coronavirus pandemic (3)
- home blood collection (3)
- microbiopsy (3)
- remote research studies (3)
- remote technologies (3)
- cannabis and cannabinoids (2)
- dried blood (2)
- mAbs (2)
- pediatric clinical trials (2)
- serology studies (2)
- DBS (1)
- Education (1)
- Extractions / Sample Prep (1)
- Genetic Profiling (1)
- Immunoassay (1)
- PEth (1)
- Sample Storage (1)
- antiepileptics (1)
- biospecimen collection (1)
- blood collection (1)
- clinical trial monitoring (1)
- creatinine (1)
- drug monitoring (1)
- genetic fingerprinting (1)
- heavy metal exposure (1)
- heavy metal poisoning (1)
- heavy metals (1)
- hormones (1)
- infectious disease studies (1)
- labs (1)
- molecular research (1)
- remote blood sampling (1)
- skin biopsy (1)
- tacrolimus (1)
- virtual clinical trials (1)
- February 2023 (1)
- January 2023 (3)
- December 2022 (2)
- November 2022 (3)
- October 2022 (4)
- September 2022 (3)
- August 2022 (5)
- July 2022 (2)
- June 2022 (2)
- May 2022 (4)
- April 2022 (3)
- March 2022 (3)
- February 2022 (4)
- January 2022 (5)
- December 2021 (3)
- November 2021 (5)
- October 2021 (3)
- September 2021 (3)
- August 2021 (4)
- July 2021 (4)
- June 2021 (4)
- May 2021 (4)
- April 2021 (3)
- March 2021 (5)
- February 2021 (4)
- January 2021 (4)
- December 2020 (3)
- November 2020 (5)
- October 2020 (4)
- September 2020 (3)
- August 2020 (3)
- July 2020 (6)
- June 2020 (4)
- May 2020 (4)
- April 2020 (3)
- March 2020 (6)
- February 2020 (3)
- January 2020 (4)
- December 2019 (5)
- November 2019 (6)
- October 2019 (4)
- September 2019 (5)
- August 2019 (5)
- July 2019 (4)
- June 2019 (7)
- May 2019 (6)
- April 2019 (5)
- March 2019 (6)
- February 2019 (6)
- January 2019 (8)
- December 2018 (4)
- November 2018 (4)
- October 2018 (7)
- September 2018 (8)
- August 2018 (6)
- July 2018 (8)
- June 2018 (6)
- May 2018 (5)
- April 2018 (6)
- March 2018 (5)
- February 2018 (7)
- January 2018 (4)
- December 2017 (2)
- November 2017 (3)
- October 2017 (2)
- September 2017 (5)
- August 2017 (2)
- July 2017 (4)
- June 2017 (5)
- May 2017 (6)
- April 2017 (6)
- March 2017 (5)
- February 2017 (4)
- January 2017 (1)
- July 2016 (3)
- May 2016 (1)
- April 2016 (2)
No Comments Yet
Let us know what you think