Automation

[LAURIE]

For those of you who have evaluated and subsequently gone with automation, what criteria swayed you to one instrument or the other? Any problems encountered? All insight would be greatly appreciated! We are currently looking at the Provue and Echo...we are gel system users right now and very comfortable with it.

[mda]

Since you are using gel method and comfortable with it....go for the ProVue. We currently have 2 ProVues and it really works good for us.

[Likewine99]

I'm with mda, go with a ProVue if you are on gel, we have had one for 3 years and are very happy with it.

We eliminated a lot of bench gel card QC, whatever cards are used on the ProVue get QC'd by the machine, less work at the bench!

[catmontgomery]

We looked at Ortho's ProVue and Immucor's Galileo 4 years ago. Echo was not available at the time of our decision. If you are on GEL it will be easier to continue with GEL method instrumentation, if the ProVue goes down, you have a good backup with manual GEL. We love our ProVue, yes it is not your everyday STAT instrument, we have managed to do emergent STATS on the bench at times that the ProVue is performing alot of ASAP or Routine testing. We have had great service from Ortho, if there is any question that they can not answer they get back to u s or even send service. We love having the QC performed on the machine. Maintenance is minimal, if you have a probe crash-service must replace the probe-after techs have learned how to operate the instrument with general care the probe crash shouldn't be an issue. If you are looking for instrumentation to help with safety issues (manual bench testing has increase errors compared to instrument testing) the ProVue will help, even more when you have a bidirectional interface.

[John C. Staley]

You may want to evaluate other systems as well as the Provue. We have an Echo and ran an ABS2000 for almost 10 years and found both to be very good insturments. Just because you are familiar with gel is no reason to automatically exclude others. From what I'm hearing the Tango is a very good analyzer as well. Don't limit you options just because you are comfortable.

Your work load/patient mix may be better served with something else. I know Immucor has a very good workload evaluation tool that may be of some value to help you understand your needs better.

[mhc]

I agree with John. We have been manual gel users for over 10 years and have had ProVue for about 5, but we are now moving to the Galileo and the Echo, mostly because of the increased throughput and flexibility that those 2 machines offer. Plus, there's a little bit of a cost savings. I know it will take some time for my staff to get used to the new platform, but I think that it will work out better for us in the long run.

[jcoburn]

There is a lot to be said with staying within your comfort level, but there are trade-offs, too. Like John, we have the Echo and it fits our needs very well, but we were manual tube before so we had no vested interest in any particular platform. There is a bit of a cost/test difference but probably not enough to be the primary impetus for selection (although I've heard that recent price increases by "some manufacturers" might negate the validity of that last statement). Watch out for maintenance contract charges: Ortho wanted twice what Immucor quoted, but maybe their instrument requires more service?

[Cornelia Kuehn]

For those of you who have evaluated and subsequently gone with automation, what criteria swayed you to one instrument or the other? Any problems encountered? All insight would be greatly appreciated! We are currently looking at the Provue and Echo...we are gel system users right now and very comfortable with it.

Laurie,

I think your decision depends a little bit on the throughput of the machines. An Echo and also the Provue are equipment for smaller labs - and if you think about Echo you are thinking about an other technology so I think you have not really a problem to switch. So the Tango is mayby also a possible opportunity because the solid screen method running on this system for the Antibodyscreening has a higher specificity than the Capture technology .

I am from Germany and we have made here a direct comparison between Galileo and Tango and that was one of the results of this benchmark

[krichards]

We purchased 2 Echos this year. Prior to that we were using the Ortho gel. We had absolutely no trouble making the transition, even though the idea had been met with a greal of resistance by several techs prior to implementation. I would not factor the change in methodology into my decision if I were you.

When using the Ortho gel, we had trouble with a higher than average number of patients with non-specific colds...and we have the same percentage now with Immucor. Same goes with the patients who react to the additives in the gel/plates...the number is the same now as it was when we were using the gel.

Like you, we seriously looked at both the Echo and the Provue. Our decision was based on ease of use, downtime, difficulty of maintenance, and price. It was a tough decision, but we eventually decided to go with the Echos for these reasons. We have had no trouble with the transition, and no regrets regarding our decision. In fact, the techs who were most resistant to the change are now the Echos' biggest fans.

[MM@WIH]

Glad to hear all of the positive feedback about the Echo. We have used gel for 7 years and just recently signed an agreement for two Echo instruments.

[Mary Leslie]

What LIS interface platforms support the Echo?

[krichards]

We use Sunquest, and it supports the Echo (as well as the Proview).

[MediaMan369]

We have been gel users for approximately 7 years (types by tube) and we just purchased a TANGO. Although the methodology is different for antibody screens, we absolutely love it. We evaluated the Provue, Echo and Tango. We have been online for about 3 months with no issues. It has really improved overall efficiency and reagent costs are down.

[Mary Leslie]

What have you found your TAT to be for antibody screens? Thanks!

[MediaMan369]

The TAT on the TANGO for a single antibody screen in approximately 30 minutes. The TAT for a Type and Screen is approximately 30 minutes. Based on the centrifuge, the TANGO can process 10 antibody screens in 40 to 45 minutes. During the validation, I loaded 35 samples for ABO, Rh and antibody screen and the results were complete in 3 hours.

[RR1]

Hi Cornelia,

I don't know much about the Tango - does this use liquid screening cells that are adhered to microplates or is the microplate pre-coated as for the capture screen?

Thanks

Rashmi

[Cornelia Kuehn]

Hi Cornelia,

I don't know much about the Tango - does this use liquid screening cells that are adhered to microplates or is the microplate pre-coated as for the capture screen?

Thanks

Rashmi

Hi Rashmi

the TANGO use the microtiterplate technology with liquid screening cells not precoated as the capture method the specificity is better and here in Germany were I am from we have some studys if you are interested in I`ll send it to you

regards

Cornelia;)

[RR1]

Hi Cornelia,

I would be really grateful for a copy of the study. The integrity of the screening cells is a critical factor in the testing proces, I can't help feeling that if we manipulate red cells too much - it is possible to lose some of the more 'fragile' antigens- which could explain anamolous results labs are reporting.

my email is : rashmirook@hotmail.com

Many thanks

Rashmi

[aoliveg]

Dear Cornelia

Please, send me more information about TANGO performance in your lab to inmunodiagnostico@gmail.com

Thanks

Alex

[Steve N]

Hello Cornelia,

I just saw this thread but I wouldalso really appreciate the information about the TANGO performance in your lab. If you could send it to SteveNa_13@yahoo.com, that would be great.

Thanks,

Steve

[Mabel Adams]

I was wondering if anyone has a chart or spreadsheet of criteria used to evaluate Blood Bank automation systems that they would share. I know of a few issues that should be on it, like which tests it can run and whether you can add on stats easily plus TAT etc. but I am hoping to borrow the brains of someone that has already thought of everything so I don't have to.

[Mabel Adams]

Can you please share what you wish you had known about your automated platform before getting it?

[BankerGirl]

I am interested to know what folks have discovered after they chose their automation system as well. We are looking at automation in the near future, and I have heard conflicting information about reagent/reaction strip waste for one of the analyzers. Of course the positive spin came from that company's rep, and the negative spin from a competitor, so I am asking the users. We are a medium sized lab averaging 400 type and screens and 25 antibody workups a month.

[carolyn swickard]

I am interested to know what folks have discovered after they chose their automation system as well. We are looking at automation in the near future, and I have heard conflicting information about reagent/reaction strip waste for one of the analyzers. Of course the positive spin came from that company's rep, and the negative spin from a competitor, so I am asking the users. We are a medium sized lab averaging 400 type and screens and 25 antibody workups a month.

The Echo would work well for you - the RS3 strips only need 2 pts to be full, so most of the time they are. Little waste and what there is, is pretty cheap. The Ready-ID strips are 1 pt per run, so no waste there. The Select strips which can be used for IgG XMs and IgG DATs and Du testing, will run 4 tests each, so are usually not full, but again cheap. The CMT strips for ABORh and ABO re- check testing is 1 pt or 2 pts per strip - very little waste there.

We are very happy with our Echo, especially now that Immucor is catching up with the early sales surge and the Technical people are readily availible for help and trouble shooting. They do a good job. You do need a high speed internet connection for remote diagnostics, DSL or faster (a dial-up modem will not! work at all) - so check with your computer system to make sure they will allow that if your are going to be interfaced with it (we aren't). The instrument is easy to learn and teach and most pm and midnight techs love it - easy to load and run and come back later. Solid-phase is a very sensitive method, similar to PEG - you will see antibodies on it that are non-specific. You have to get used to that and have procedures for dealing with them that do not work you to death. The only thing we are unhappy with right now is the latest software upgrade - it has caused some problems that Immucor is working on fixing (not fast enough!!) - but that happens to all software and is something you also have to live with. Good luck with your decision and your choice.