Evaluation of an in-clinic dry chemistry analyzer for canine, equine, and feline plasma samples.
Abstract: Method validation studies characterize the performance of new laboratory methods relative to established methods using quality guidelines in order to define the new method's performance characteristics and to identify differences that could influence data interpretation. We investigated the performance of an in-clinic dry chemistry analyzer (Catalyst One, IDEXX) for measuring 19 routine plasma biochemistry analytes in dogs, cats, and horses. We analyzed 2 levels of quality control material (QCM) in duplicate twice daily for 5 d to determine the coefficient of variation (CV), percent bias, observed total error (TE), and sigma metric (σ) for each analyte at each level of QCM. We analyzed 82 canine, equine, and feline plasma samples with the in-clinic dry chemistry analyzer and a reference wet chemistry analyzer, and results were compared using correlation coefficients, Deming regression, and Bland-Altman analyses. CVs were 4 at both levels of QCM for 5 analytes, and at one level of QCM for 5 analytes; sigma metrics were <3 or could not be calculated at the remaining analyte concentrations. All analytes, except glucose, showed various magnitudes of bias compared to the wet chemistry analyzer. Based on these results, we recommend statistical (5 analytes) and non-statistical (14 analytes) QC measures and analyzer-specific reference intervals.
Publication Date: 2018-10-20 PubMed ID: 30343645PubMed Central: PMC6505834DOI: 10.1177/1040638718809407Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
- Evaluation Study
- Journal Article
Summary
This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.
The research article evaluates the performance of an in-clinic dry chemistry analyzer, Catalyst One from IDEXX, in measuring 19 plasma biochemistry analytes in dogs, cats, and horses. It identifies some differences and biases in results compared to a reference wet chemistry analyzer and provides recommendations based on these findings.
Methodology
- The researchers conducted method validation studies to assess the performance of the Catalyst One analyzer.
- The analysis involved 2 levels of Quality Control Material (QCM) which was measured in duplicate twice a day for 5 days.
- The study determined the Coefficient of Variation (CV), percent bias, observed Total Error (TE), and sigma metric (σ) for each analyte at each level of QCM.
- In addition, 82 plasma samples from dogs, cats, and horses were also analyzed using the dry chemistry analyzer and a reference wet chemistry analyzer.
- The researchers compared the results using correlation coefficients, Deming regression, and Bland-Altman analyses.
Results
- For 16 out of 19 analytes, the CV was less than 5%, while for the remaining 3 analytes it was equal to or greater than 5%.
- The Total Error was less than allowable total error for 9 analytes but exceeded the allowable total error for 10 analytes.
- The sigma metrics were greater than 4 at both levels of QCM for five analytes, and at one level of QCM for another five analytes while it was less than 3 or could not be calculated at the remaining analyte concentrations.
- All analytes, except glucose, showed various degrees of bias compared to the wet chemistry analyzer.
Conclusion and Recommendations
- Statistical and non-statistical Quality Control measures were recommended – statistical for 5 analytes and non-statistical for the remaining 14 analytes.
- The researchers also suggested that the use of analyzer-specific reference intervals might be necessary due to the observed differences and biases in results.
Cite This Article
APA
Boes KM, Sink CA, Camus MS, Werre SR.
(2018).
Evaluation of an in-clinic dry chemistry analyzer for canine, equine, and feline plasma samples.
J Vet Diagn Invest, 30(6), 902-910.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1040638718809407 Publication
Researcher Affiliations
- Department of Biomedical Sciences and Pathobiology (Boes), Virginia-Maryland College of Veterinary Medicine, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA.
- Veterinary Teaching Hospital (Sink), Virginia-Maryland College of Veterinary Medicine, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA.
- Department of Population Health Sciences (Werre), Virginia-Maryland College of Veterinary Medicine, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA.
- Department of Pathology, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Georgia, Athens, GA (Camus).
- Department of Biomedical Sciences and Pathobiology (Boes), Virginia-Maryland College of Veterinary Medicine, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA.
- Veterinary Teaching Hospital (Sink), Virginia-Maryland College of Veterinary Medicine, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA.
- Department of Population Health Sciences (Werre), Virginia-Maryland College of Veterinary Medicine, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA.
- Department of Pathology, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Georgia, Athens, GA (Camus).
- Department of Biomedical Sciences and Pathobiology (Boes), Virginia-Maryland College of Veterinary Medicine, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA.
- Veterinary Teaching Hospital (Sink), Virginia-Maryland College of Veterinary Medicine, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA.
- Department of Population Health Sciences (Werre), Virginia-Maryland College of Veterinary Medicine, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA.
- Department of Pathology, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Georgia, Athens, GA (Camus).
- Department of Biomedical Sciences and Pathobiology (Boes), Virginia-Maryland College of Veterinary Medicine, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA.
- Veterinary Teaching Hospital (Sink), Virginia-Maryland College of Veterinary Medicine, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA.
- Department of Population Health Sciences (Werre), Virginia-Maryland College of Veterinary Medicine, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA.
- Department of Pathology, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Georgia, Athens, GA (Camus).
MeSH Terms
- Animals
- Blood Chemical Analysis / veterinary
- Cats / blood
- Dogs / blood
- Horses / blood
- Plasma
- Reference Values
- Reproducibility of Results
Conflict of Interest Statement
KM Boes and C Sink declare that the in-clinic dry chemistry analyzer was provided to the Virginia-Maryland College of Veterinary Medicine by the manufacturer at a discounted rate, and that some test cartridges were also gifted by the manufacturer. M Camus and S Werre declare no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
References
This article includes 5 references
- Farr AJ, Freeman KP. Quality control validation, application of sigma metrics, and performance comparison between two biochemistry analyzers in a commercial veterinary laboratory.. J Vet Diagn Invest 2008 Sep;20(5):536-44.
- Flatland B, Freeman KP, Vap LM, Harr KE. ASVCP guidelines: quality assurance for point-of-care testing in veterinary medicine.. Vet Clin Pathol 2013 Dec;42(4):405-23.
- Gras JM, Philippe M. Application of the Six Sigma concept in clinical laboratories: a review.. Clin Chem Lab Med 2007;45(6):789-96.
- Harr KE, Flatland B, Nabity M, Freeman KP. ASVCP guidelines: allowable total error guidelines for biochemistry.. Vet Clin Pathol 2013 Dec;42(4):424-36.
- Jensen AL, Kjelgaard-Hansen M. Method comparison in the clinical laboratory.. Vet Clin Pathol 2006 Sep;35(3):276-86.
Citations
This article has been cited 5 times.- Brans M, Marynissen S, Mortier F, Duchateau L, Daminet S, Paepe D. Effect of storage temperature and time on measurement of serum symmetric dimethylarginine concentration using point-of-care and commercial laboratory analyzers in cats and dogs. J Vet Intern Med 2023 Sep-Oct;37(5):1794-1805.
- Klykken C, Boissonnot L, Reed AK, Whatmore P, Attramadal K, Olsen RE. Gene expression patterns in Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) with severe nephrocalcinosis. J Fish Dis 2022 Nov;45(11):1645-1658.
- Cedeño Y, Miranda M, Orjales I, Herrero-Latorre C, Suárez M, Luna D, López-Alonso M. Trace Element Levels in Serum Are Potentially Valuable Diagnostic Markers in Dogs. Animals (Basel) 2020 Dec 7;10(12).
- Chenal T, Lambert M, Prieux A, Ludemann E, Granat F, Bourgès-Abella N, Trumel C. Validation of a mobile clinical pathology laboratory for canine hematology and biochemistry. BMC Vet Res 2025 Apr 22;21(1):283.
- Marteles D, Lebrero ME, Fernández A, Ortín A, González A, Morell C, Villanueva MJ, Schäfer I, Quílez P, Verde M, Gómez A, Villanueva-Saz S. Impact of single versus multiple infection on serum protein fractions in cats. Vet Res Commun 2025 Apr 4;49(3):158.
Use Nutrition Calculator
Check if your horse's diet meets their nutrition requirements with our easy-to-use tool Check your horse's diet with our easy-to-use tool
Talk to a Nutritionist
Discuss your horse's feeding plan with our experts over a free phone consultation Discuss your horse's diet over a phone consultation
Submit Diet Evaluation
Get a customized feeding plan for your horse formulated by our equine nutritionists Get a custom feeding plan formulated by our nutritionists
