We currently have an Echo and are looking at a possible change.  Anybody out there a former Echo user that is now using the Biorad Infinity or the Ortho Vision?  I'm looking for honest feedback on likes and dislikes.  

The nice part about changing from Echo is that the Vision uses the same technology on the manual bench as on the analyzer.

The Griffols Erytrya and Griffols bench procedures use the same technology too.  I am a proponent of the bench and analyzer to use the same technology.

I am a fan of automation in the BB, regardless of the vendor or the size of your BB.  Fewer chances for errors and it frees up your techs to do "other things".  

The nice part about staying with an Echo is that you are "staying the same".  I am sure $$ will factor into this decision at some point.

I currently do lab IT and we have interfaced Biorad Tangos, soon to interface an Infinity.  Our organization was required to purchase a third party piece of software to get this analyzer to interface to Mediware HCLL.  This added an extra layer of "work" and most likely cost.  

Good luck, this is a big decision, hope all goes well for you.

 

 

We were using the Echo and were having to repeat a lot of screens by gel due to all screening cells positive on the Echo and report those results.  We  switched to the Provue and will be switching to the Vision when we move into our new hospital.   You can contact me off line if you would like more information.

Would appreciate anybody with comments who use's either of these instruments no matter if you had a previous Echo or not.  Thanks

I currently use the Bio-Rad Tango and love it; going to the Infinity next year.

We are using an Echo and have been for the last approx 8 years. We had been using manual gel prior to that and I switched us to solid phase because I got tired of having to resort to tube/PeG to resolve weakly reactive antibody IDs that gel couldn't quite pull off. Our contract is up for renewal in the next year, so I'll take a look again at what's out there in the automation world.

Right now I'm not very inclined to make a switch because of the following... Do we get some non-specific reactions with solid phase/Echo? - Yes, but in our patient population its not a real burden. Do we ID some antibodies that are weak to non-existent with tube/LISS or tube/PeG? Yes, absolutely and I believe that based on our original validation, for us solid phase was more sensitive than gel. Do CAP survey results show equivalent performance between all methods? - Based on past survey results, the Echo performs well, perhaps a bit better than other automated methods. We haven't had any survey failures using solid phase and the Echo. (To be fair, there could be human factors that cause the outliers with other methods.) Ease of use and training new staff - no problems. Good workflow and good speed - Yes. Good customer service from Immucor - Yes. Generally satisfied - Yes.

 

On ‎7‎/‎21‎/‎2016 at 8:17 AM, tbostock said:

I currently use the Bio-Rad Tango and love it; going to the Infinity next year.

I have heard great things about the Tango!  I have a question - what do you do for back up manual testing? 

s

On 8/4/2016 at 8:24 AM, AMcCord said:

We are using an Echo and have been for the last approx 8 years. We had been using manual gel prior to that and I switched us to solid phase because I got tired of having to resort to tube/PeG to resolve weakly reactive antibody IDs that gel couldn't quite pull off. Our contract is up for renewal in the next year, so I'll take a look again at what's out there in the automation world.

Right now I'm not very inclined to make a switch because of the following... Do we get some non-specific reactions with solid phase/Echo? - Yes, but in our patient population its not a real burden. Do we ID some antibodies that are weak to non-existent with tube/LISS or tube/PeG? Yes, absolutely and I believe that based on our original validation, for us solid phase was more sensitive than gel. Do CAP survey results show equivalent performance between all methods? - Based on past survey results, the Echo performs well, perhaps a bit better than other automated methods. We haven't had any survey failures using solid phase and the Echo. (To be fair, there could be human factors that cause the outliers with other methods.) Ease of use and training new staff - no problems. Good workflow and good speed - Yes. Good customer service from Immucor - Yes. Generally satisfied - Yes.

 

So tube is your back up method?

If there is anyone up and running on the Infinity, I would love to have an off-line conversation about your implementation experience and differences bewteen the Optimo and Infinity.

Yes, tube is our backup though we seldom need to use it. We have a manual station for solid phase but haven't validated it - someday, when I have time, I would like to do that.

We currently use the Ortho ProVe, but are looking at the Erytra by Grifols.  I really wanted to maintain the ability to have manual back-up with the same method.  We only use tube for trouble shooting (warms/colds/etc...).  Even heelsticks can be put on the Erytra.  With their phenotyping cards, I'm hoping to automate a lot more than we currently do.  Honestly, I've been disappointed in Ortho's reagent cells.  We often have HLA+ cells on our RhIg short panel.  It creates extented work-ups for something that should be easy.  I also like that the Erytra is random access with two pipetting systems & two centrifuges that can work independently if one is down...kind-of like a back up analyzer built in.  Grifols is the company that manufactured the ProVue for Ortho.

On ‎8‎/‎16‎/‎2016 at 8:01 AM, AuntiS said:

I have heard great things about the Tango!  I have a question - what do you do for back up manual testing? 

s

We use Ortho gel; as soon as Bio-Rad's gel is FDA approved, we will switch.  I really like having the two methods (gel and solid phase); lets us do a lot in house without having to send to a reference lab.

On ‎8‎/‎24‎/‎2016 at 2:52 PM, AMcCord said:

Yes, tube is our backup though we seldom need to use it. We have a manual station for solid phase but haven't validated it - someday, when I have time, I would like to do that.

We are looking at automation for our lab (from manual gel).  The rep from Immucor actually suggested we use the solid phase manual stations initially and then use the automation.  Her rationale - since we were switching methodologies it would be good for staff to use and understand the solid phase before switching over to the automation part of it.  I have to admit - I think it is something we would consider if/when we get automation!

s

The Immucor manual station was a pain. Techs refused to use it and was using manual tubes for typing and gel for ABS. instead.

23 hours ago, AuntiS said:

We are looking at automation for our lab (from manual gel).  The rep from Immucor actually suggested we use the solid phase manual stations initially and then use the automation.  Her rationale - since we were switching methodologies it would be good for staff to use and understand the solid phase before switching over to the automation part of it.  I have to admit - I think it is something we would consider if/when we get automation!

s

That sounds like a good idea actually. If the crew is well trained and comfortable using the manual station prior to using automation, they would be more likely to resort to it instead of tube and gel (what they have been familiar and comfortable with).

We didn't keep gel, so tube is the only option for backup. That might be a game changer in acceptance of the manual station. That, and unrelenting nagging from me when/if we go in that direction.