Method Comparison of Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate Automated Systems, the VES-MATIC 5 (DIESSE) and Test 1 (ALIFAX), with the Reference Method in Routine Practice

Abstract

Background: The erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) is a routine and aspecific test that is still widely used. The reference-manual method for ESR determination is the Westergren method. The VES-MATIC 5 is a novel, fully automated, and closed system based on a modified Westergren method. This study conceived the aim of comparing two ESR analytical analysers, Test 1 and the VES-MATIC 5, with the reference method in routine practice. Methods: This study included 264 randomly analysed samples. A comparison between the two methods and Westergren was performed, and they were evaluated for inter-run and intra-run precision. In addition, we investigated possible interferences and different sensitivities to conventional analytes. Results: The comparison of methods by Passing–Bablok analysis provided a good agreement for both systems, with a better correlation for VES-MATIC 5 (p = 0.96) than Test 1 (p = 0.93), and sensitivity studies did not show any significant influence. Conclusions: The VES-MATIC 5 analyser demonstrated excellent comparability with the reference method, and it had better performance than Test 1. It can be employed in routine practice, bringing advantages such as a reduction in the probability of human error compared to the manual method, as well as an increase in operator safety and environmental protection.