描述了一例Evans综合征女性患者体内溶血的病例报告。患者因贫血和黄疸入院,在她26天的住院期间,有83个样本用于生化分析。尽管有多种治疗方法,但由于持续的补体介导的体内溶血,实验室溶血指数(HI)经常升高。最初,根据制造商的建议,许多生化参数的释放被阻止,并报告为“样品溶血”。病人出现了严重的急性肾损伤,最终需要透析.在持续溶血的情况下,自动及时报告指示性肌酐和其他生化结果,因此,对病人护理至关重要。在回顾了各种来源的文献之后,设计了一种实验室算法,以确保及时释放生化数值,在可能的情况下,附有适当的解释性评论。生物化学,血液学,和肾脏科团队定期沟通,以确保快速识别患者样本,根据算法进行了分析和验证,及时通知,安全和适当的病人护理。最终,患者因多种疾病和治疗相关并发症死亡.结合临床用户,实验室应该为情况做好计划,如体内溶血,对于某些患者,生物化学方法中不可避免的重大干扰可能以持续的方式发生。在这种情况下,报告分类或最佳估计的生物化学结果对患者来说比没有报告任何结果更安全。临床团队对这些结果的解释需要经过适当培训和合格的实验室人员的输入。
A case report of in vivo hemolysis in a female patient with Evans syndrome is described. The patient was admitted with anemia and jaundice and, during her 26-day hospital admission, had 83 samples taken for biochemistry analyses. The laboratory hemolytic index (HI) was frequently elevated due to persistent complement-mediated in vivo hemolysis despite multiple lines of therapy. Initially, the release of many biochemical parameters was blocked per the manufacturer´s recommendations and reported as \"sample hemolyzed\". The patient developed severe acute kidney injury, ultimately requiring dialysis. Automated and timely reporting of indicative creatinine and other biochemical results in the context of ongoing hemolysis, therefore, became essential to patient care. Following a review of literature from various sources, a laboratory algorithm was designed to ensure the timely release of numerical biochemical values, where possible, with appropriate interpretative comments appended. Biochemistry, hematology, and nephrology teams were in regular communication to ensure patient samples were rapidly identified, analyzed and validated according to the algorithm, informing timely, safe and appropriate patient care. Ultimately, the patient died due to multiple disease- and treatment-related complications. In conjunction with clinical users, laboratories should plan for situations, such as in vivo hemolysis, where significant unavoidable interferences in biochemistry methodologies may occur in an ongoing manner for certain patients. Reporting categorical or best-estimate biochemistry results in such cases can be safer for patients than failing to report any results. Interpretation of these results by clinical teams requires input from appropriately trained and qualified laboratory personnel.