Clin Chem Lab Med. 2026 Jan 8. doi: 10.1515/cclm-2025-1126. Online ahead of print.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of robotic venipuncture in clinical settings and compare its performance with manual venipuncture in terms of blood specimen quality and test results.
METHODS: From March to April 2025, 63 participants (35 females, 28 males), aged 23-73 years, were recruited at Zoucheng People’s Hospital Medical Laboratory Center. Blood samples were collected using both robotic venipuncture and manual venipuncture on April 8, 2025. Specimen quality was assessed pre-testing, and coagulation/biochemical parameters were analyzed.
RESULTS: Robotic venipuncture demonstrated advantages in reducing venipuncture pain and achieving more consistent blood sample mixing. Compared with manual venipuncture, the robotic system enables more precise control of blood collection volume and anticoagulant ratio. Statistically significant differences (p<0.05) were observed in fibrinogen (Fib), prothrombin time (PT), plasminogen activity (PTA), activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT), International Normalized Ratio (INR), thrombin time (TT), potassium (K+), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), α-hydroxybutyrate dehydrogenase (HBDH) levels between the two methods.
CONCLUSIONS: Robotic venipuncture technology demonstrates clinical feasibility, offering more precise blood collection volumes and accurate anticoagulant-to-blood ratios compared to manual venipuncture, thereby enhancing specimen stability (Lippi G, Salvagno GL, Montagnana M, Lima-Oliveira G, Guidi GC, Favaloro EJ. Quality standards for sample collection in coagulation testing. Semin Thromb Hemost. 2012;38:565-75; Reneke J, Etzell J, Leslie S, Ng VL, Gottfried EL. Prolonged prothrombin time and activated partial thromboplastin time due to underfilled specimen tubes with 109 mmol/L (3.2 %) citrate anticoagulant. Am J Clin Pathol. 1998;109:754-7). However, challenges remain, including longer procedure times and initial user acceptance barriers.
PMID:41498135 | DOI:10.1515/cclm-2025-1126
