Comparison of 2 glucose analytical methodologies in immature Kemp’s ridley sea turtles: dry chemistry of plasma versus point-of-care glucometer analysis of whole blood

Abstract

Blood glucose measurements provide important diagnostic information regarding stress, disease, and nutritional status. Glucose analytical methodologies include dry chemistry analysis (DCA) of plasma and point-of-care (POC) glucometer analysis of whole blood; however, these 2 methods differ in cost, required sample volume, and processing time. Because POC glucometers use built-in equations based on features of mammalian blood to convert whole blood measurements to plasma equivalent units, obtained glucose data must be compared and validated using gold-standard chemistry analytical methodology in reptiles. For in-water, trawl-captured, immature Kemp’s ridley sea turtles (Lepidochelys kempii) from Georgia, USA, we observed significant, positive agreement between the 2 glucose determination methods; however, the glucometer overestimated glucose concentrations by 1.4 mmol/L on average in comparison to DCA and produced a wider range of results. The discordance of these results suggests that POC glucometer glucose data should be interpreted in the context of methodology- and brand-specific reference intervals along with concurrent packed cell volume data.

Keywords

marine turtle packed cell volume plasma biochemistry point-of-care device

The use of point-of-care (POC) devices, including handheld glucometers, is increasing in wildlife health studies as a result of improved logistics and handling in the field, low costs, small required sample volume, and near real-time results.^26,31 Glucose analysis in wild and rehabilitating sea turtle patients provides important state-of-health information, including acute stress, disease, various underlying metabolic derangements, and nutritional status; hence, glucose is considered a critical diagnostic analyte and is important for decision-making during sea turtle rehabilitation.²⁴ Plasma or serum glucose analysis by standard chemistry analyzers is considered the gold standard compared to glucometers; however, laboratory chemistry analyses come at increased costs with longer turnaround times.^10,15 POC glucometers using combined glucose oxidase and potentiometry have been validated for use in 2 sea turtle species (green sea turtles, Chelonia mydas; loggerhead turtles, Caretta caretta)^16,22; however, method comparison and validation have not yet been reported in Kemp’s ridley sea turtles (syn. Atlantic ridley; Lepidochelys kempii). Glucometers can be useful in field assessments or during mass strandings of this critically endangered species,³⁰ especially as “cold-stunning” events continue to occur during winter months along the East Coast of the United States.¹¹ Glucometer analysis of whole blood in sea turtles has shown a slight positive bias in comparison to plasma analysis by dry chemistry analysis (DCA).^16,22 Therefore, for free-ranging, immature Kemp’s ridley sea turtles from Georgia, USA, our objectives were to 1) compare glucose concentrations using 2 different analytical methods: DCA using plasma and POC glucometer using whole blood; 2) determine the impact of packed cell volume (PCV) on glucometer measurements; and 3) establish reference intervals (RIs) for the glucometer.

Sample collection and processing followed previously documented procedures.²¹ Briefly, Kemp’s ridley sea turtles were captured using trawling^3,4 and sampled from 31 May–15 Jul 2016 (n = 16) and 5 Jun–19 Jul 2017 (n = 18) off Brunswick, GA. No animals were captured or sampled more than once. Blood was collected from the external jugular vein¹⁹ of each turtle and was placed into 10-mL sodium heparin vacutainer tubes (Becton Dickinson). An aliquot of well-mixed heparinized whole blood was used to determine PCV and glucose using a POC glucometer (TRUEtrack; Nipro Diagnostics) based on combined glucose oxidase and potentiometry for use in whole blood.

Whole blood samples were centrifuged immediately (within 5 min of collection) on the research vessel at 944 × g (3,600 rpm) for 5 min. Plasma was separated, visually assessed for the presence of lipemia and hemolysis,^2,25 and stored in liquid nitrogen onboard for several days until stored in a shore-based ultralow freezer for up to 3 mo. Frozen plasma samples were shipped overnight on dry ice to the University of Miami Avian & Wildlife Laboratory for glucose analysis using glucose oxidase and reflectance photometry by dry slide chemistry analyzer (250XR; Ortho Clinical Diagnostics).

Statistical analyses were performed using statistical software (v.19.1; MedCalc). Agreement between glucose results for the DCA using plasma and the POC glucometer using whole blood was assessed using Passing–Bablok regression and Bland–Altman difference plots. Differences in glucose concentrations between the 2 methods were determined using a paired sample t-test. Because the POC glucometer works best at a PCV range of 0.30 to 0.55 L/L, we also re-ran Passing–Bablok regressions and Bland–Altman difference plots after removal of samples with a PCV < 0.30 L/L (n = 8). Linear least-squares regressions were used to establish a conversion equation between POC glucometer concentrations and plasma glucose concentrations. Lastly, RIs (95%, with associated 90% confidence intervals) for whole blood glucose using the glucometer were also calculated using parametric methods based on recommendations for sample sizes ≥ 20, but < 40.⁹ Normality was assessed using the Shapiro–Wilk test; outliers were detected using the Reed test.

We included 34 Kemp’s ridley sea turtles in our study. The animals were considered to be in good health based on 1) results of physical examination, 2) absence of excessive epibiota, and 3) good visual body condition.²¹ Mean ± SD glucose concentrations using the DCA with plasma were 6.8 ± 1.1 mmol/L (range: 4.7–9.2 mmol/L; n = 34) and using the glucometer with whole blood were 8.2 ± 2.2 mmol/L (range: 4.9–13.5 mmol/L; n = 33; Table 1). Mean ± SD PCV was 0.32 ± 0.05 L/L (range: 0.20–0.44 L/L; n = 33; Table 1).²¹ One adult female (min. straight carapace length = 61.5 cm) was excluded from the calculation of RIs, because this individual was the only mature turtle captured (breeding size of Kemp’s ridleys is ≥ 58 cm standard straight carapace length)⁸ and RIs established here are for immature Kemp’s ridley sea turtles; a second turtle was missing a reading for glucose by glucometer.

Table 1.

Measures of central tendency, range, and reference intervals (RIs; with 90% confidence intervals for upper and lower limits) for plasma glucose using dry chemistry analysis (DCA) and whole blood glucose using a glucometer for in-water, immature Kemp’s ridley sea turtles (Lepidochelys kempii). Parametric methods for sample sizes ≥ 20 but < 40 were used to calculate RIs.⁹ Normality was assessed using the Shapiro–Wilk test; outliers were detected using the Reed test. All plasma samples were free of hemolysis and lipemia, except for one sample with mild (1+) lipemia, which is not considered to cause interference using DCA.²⁵

	Mean ± SD	Median	Range	n	RI	90% LRL	90% URL
Glucose (plasma)*
mmol/L	6.8 ± 1.1	6.7	4.7–9.2	34	4.7–8.9	4.1–5.2	8.4–9.4
(mg/dL)	(123 ± 20)	(121)	(85–166)	(34)	(85–160)	(74–94)	(151–169)
Glucose (whole blood)
mmol/L	8.2 ± 2.2	8.0	4.9–13.5	33	4.0–12.5	2.9–5.1	11.4–13.6
(mg/dL)	(148 ± 40)	(144)	(88–243)	(33)	(72–225)	(52–92)	(205–245)

Data presented as SI units and conventional units (in parentheses). LRL = lower reference limit; SD = standard deviation; URL = upper reference limit.

Data were previously reported,²¹ but are also included here for comparison to point-of-care glucometer concentrations.

A paired sample t-test indicated that glucose measurements differed significantly (t(32) = 5.577; p < 0.001) between glucose concentrations determined by DCA and the POC device (Fig. 1A). Passing–Bablok regression analysis showed a strong linear association between the 2 methods (r_s = 0.72; p < 0.001; Fig. 1B); however, both systematic and proportional differences were observed between the 2 methods, and the Bland–Altman plot indicated a negative bias (−1.4 mmol/L; limits of agreement: −4.4 and 1.5 mmol/L), with the POC glucometer giving higher results than the DCA (Fig. 1C). A total of 29 of 33 (88%) samples had higher glucose concentrations when analyzed by glucometer compared to the DCA. When glucose measurements associated with PCV values < 0.30 L/L were removed from method comparisons, the Passing–Bablok regression r_s value increased (0.72 to 0.80) and the Bland–Altman bias decreased (−1.4 mmol/L to −1.2 mmol/L); however, both systematic and proportional differences were still observed between the 2 methods.

Figure 1.

A. In a paired sample t-test, blood glucose concentrations of Kemp’s ridley sea turtles (Lepidochelys kempii) from Georgia, USA, significantly differed when using a dry chemistry analyzer (DCA; Vitros 250; Ortho-Clinical Diagnostics) compared to a point-of-care (POC) glucometer (TRUEtrack; Nipro Diagnostics). The central box represents the lower-to-upper quartile (25th–75th percentile), with the middle line representing the median. The vertical lines extend from the minimum to the maximum values. No outliers were present. Asterisks above the box indicate a significant difference at p < 0.001. B. Passing–Bablok regression comparing glucose in plasma using a DCA and in whole blood using a POC. The dashed gray line indicates the line of identity (y = x); the solid black line is the line of best fit. The dashed black lines are the 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of the slope. C. Bland–Altman difference plots comparing glucose in plasma using a DCA and in whole blood using a POC. The dashed gray line represents the line of identity, the solid black line indicates the mean difference between the 2 methods, and the black hatched lines are the 95% limits of agreement. An intercept close to 0, a slope close to 1, and a bias close to 0 indicate the fewest systematic and proportional differences between methodologies. These 2 methods had a strong linear association (r_s = 0.72), but there was a bias of 1.4 mmol/L between the 2 methods.

Previous studies on glucose comparisons using DCA and POC glucometers have been conducted in green and loggerhead sea turtles.^16,22 The glucometer brand that we used is different from the one employed in those studies^16,22; however, both brands use the same electrochemical-based methodology with glucose oxidase and potentiometry versus other optical methodology-based glucometers. Glucose consumption by RBCs continues after blood collection, and concentrations have been shown to rapidly decrease with delayed plasma separation times and sample exposure to increased temperatures.^7,16 Because our samples were processed immediately (i.e., within 5 min of collection), we can assume that our glucose measurements, both by DCA and glucometer, were not affected by continued RBC consumption.

Baseline plasma glucose concentrations for Kemp’s ridley sea turtles range from 2.3 to 11.5 mmol/L.^{1,5,6,14,17,24,25} Results from the DCA (range: 4.7–9.2 mmol/L) showed clinically normal glucose measurements for all immature turtles sampled. Similarly, glucose results from the glucometer (range: 4.9–13.5 mmol/L) also fell within the normal range of glucose concentrations for Kemp’s ridley sea turtles, except for 2 samples (12.0 mmol/L and 13.5 mmol/L). The effects of capture technique cannot be ruled out, given that forced submergence, albeit minimal, may have impacted blood glucose concentrations.²¹

Similar to other studies, the POC glucometer produced significantly higher concentrations (by 1.4 mmol/L in our study) compared to DCA results.^16,22,27,31 The 2 methods were strongly correlated; however, 25 of 33 (76%) and 8 of 33 (24%) samples had a ≥ 10% and ≥ 40% difference between the methodologies, respectively. Hence, this brand of glucometer consistently produced results that were above the total allowable error of 10% for glucose set by the American Society for Veterinary Clinical Pathology,¹³ which raises concern that this bias may affect clinical decisions. In green and loggerhead sea turtles, POC glucometers overestimated glucose concentrations by 0.1 mmol/L and 0.4 mmol/L, respectively.^16,22 This demonstrates the need for analyzer- and brand-specific RIs for glucometers, despite the use of identical analytical methodology by different manufacturers.

Handheld glucometers are designed for optimal use in humans, and reasons for the observed variations and range in results of our study likely include dissimilarities in analytical methodologies (DCA uses hexokinase and glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase; the POC glucometer uses glucose oxidase and potentiometry), reptilian RBC morphology (e.g., nucleated RBCs in reptiles vs. non-nucleated RBCs in mammals; variations in nuclear and cell size during phases of erythroid regenerative responses), PCV, electrolyte concentrations of the samples of interest, in addition to a variety of pre-analytical factors (e.g., prandial status, filling of glucose strips, partial pressure of oxygen, and even drying of isopropyl alcohol on skin before venipuncture).^10,16,22 These observed differences are also important from a clinical perspective. If using a glucometer to determine glucose concentrations in rehabilitating sea turtle patients or during population health assessments, caution is warranted in the interpretation of data because of consistently higher glucose data by glucometer across studies compared to regular chemistry analysis.^16,22 For example, hypoglycemia may go unnoticed or may be more severe than realized if using only a glucometer to determine glucose concentrations. These methodological differences should always be considered, given that decisions for treatment (e.g., fluid administration) based on these results may differ depending on which method and brand were used. Linear regression analysis revealed a significant relationship (r² = 0.61; p < 0.001) between whole blood POC glucose concentrations and plasma DCA glucose concentrations, which can be described as:

Glucos e_{DCA} = (0.39 \times Glucos e_{POC}) + 3.58

Using this equation, the coefficients of variations between the actual plasma DCA glucose concentrations and the calculated concentrations ranged from 0.1% to 11.3% (mean ± SD: 3.7 ± 3.2%), indicating that plasma glucose concentrations can be accurately predicted by whole blood glucometer concentrations using the TRUEtrack glucometer in Kemp’s ridley sea turtles.

It is possible that the reduced accuracy of the glucose measurements in sea turtles using human glucometers occurs as a consequence of the comparatively low PCV of sea turtles compared to humans, given that the device is most accurate at PCVs of 0.30 to 0.55 L/L.^16,27 PCV has been shown to influence POC glucose measurements in humans²⁷ and domestic mammals.^{12,18,20,23,28,29} These units also use built-in equations specific for mammalian blood to convert whole blood measurements to plasma equivalent units, and such equations may not be suitable for use with reptiles.^10,16 With PCV < 0.30 L/L or at the lower range of PCV for the species, POC glucose readings in whole blood tend to be higher than with mid- or upper-range PCV. Hence, an anemic sea turtle patient with PCV < 20% will have higher POC glucose, possibly masking underlying hypoglycemia. Such limitations of using glucometers must be considered in decisions regarding additional testing and medical care.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

We thank the crew of the research vessel Georgia Bulldog, including Lindsey Parker, Lisa Gentit, and H. “Truck” McIver. We also thank the team involved with blood processing: Christopher Evans, Austin Pickhardt, Julie Dingle, Sharleen Johnson, S. Michelle Pate, and Shannon Howard. We thank Drs. Craig Harms and Charlie Innis for providing feedback on earlier drafts of this manuscript.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

This project was supported by the National Marine Fisheries Service Southeastern Regional Office Award NA13NMF4720182.

Compliance with ethical standards

Our study was carried out in accordance with Endangered Species Act Section 10(a)(1)(A) permit 19621, Georgia Department of Natural Resources Scientific Collection Permit CN21303, and approved Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee protocol UF IACUC 201706823.

ORCID iD

Justin R. Perrault

References

Anderson

, et al. The effects of feeding on hematological and plasma biochemical profiles in green (Chelonia mydas) and Kemp’s ridley (Lepidochelys kempii) sea turtles. Vet Med Int 2011;2011:890829.

Andreasen

, et al. Effects of hemolysis on serum chemistry analytes in ratites. Vet Clin Pathol 1997;26:165–171.

Arendt

, et al. Spatial clustering of loggerhead sea turtles in coastal waters of the NW Atlantic Ocean: implications for management surveys. Endanger Species Res 2012;18:219–231.

Arendt

, et al. Temporal trends (2000–2011) and influences on fishery-independent catch rates for loggerhead sea turtles (Caretta caretta) at an important coastal foraging region in the southeastern United States. Fish Bull 2012;110:470–483.

Carminati

, et al. Blood chemistry comparison of healthy vs hypothermic juvenile Kemp’s ridley sea turtles (Lepidochelys kempi) in the New York Bight. In: Proc 14th Ann Symp Sea Turtle Biology and Conservation; Hilton Head, SC; March 1994:203–207. NOAA technical memorandum NMFS-SEFSC-351. https://repository.library.noaa.gov/view/noaa/6185

Coleman

, et al. Population ecology and rehabilitation of incidentally captured Kemp’s ridley sea turtles (Lepidochelys kempii) in the Mississippi Sound, USA. Herpetol Conserv Biol 2016;11:253–264.

Eisenhawer

, et al. Relationship between separation time of plasma from heparinized whole blood on plasma biochemical analytes of loggerhead sea turtles (Caretta caretta). J Zoo Wildl Med 2008;39:208–215.

Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. Marine turtle conservation handbook, 2016. https://myfwc.com/media/3133/fwc-mtconservationhandbook.pdf

Friedrichs

, et al. ASVCP reference interval guidelines: determination of de novo reference intervals in veterinary species and other related topics. Vet Clin Pathol 2012;41:441–453.

10.

Gerber

Freeman

KP.

ASVCP guidelines: quality assurance for portable blood glucose meter (glucometer) use in veterinary medicine. Vet Clin Pathol 2016;45:10–27.

11.

Griffin

, et al. Warming seas increase cold-stunning events for Kemp’s ridley sea turtles in the northwest Atlantic. PLoS One 2019;14:e0211503.

12.

Hackett

McCue

PM.

Evaluation of a veterinary glucometer for use in horses. J Vet Intern Med 2010;24:617–621.

13.

Harr

, et al. ASVCP guidelines: allowable total error guidelines for biochemistry. Vet Clin Pathol 2013;42:424–436.

14.

Innis

, et al. Hematologic and plasma biochemical findings in cold-stunned Kemp’s ridley turtles: 176 cases (2001–2005). J Am Vet Med Assoc 2009;235:426–432.

15.

Janssen

Delanghe

Importance of the pre-analytical phase in blood glucose analysis. Acta Clin Belg 2010;65:311–318.

16.

Kunze

, et al. Pre-analytical factors affecting whole blood and plasma glucose concentrations in loggerhead sea turtles (Caretta caretta). PLoS One 2020;15:e0229800.

17.

McNally

, et al. Venous blood gas and biochemical analysis of wild captured green turtles (Chelonia mydas) and Kemp’s ridley turtles (Lepidochelys kempii) from the Gulf of Mexico. PLoS One 2020;15:e0237596.

18.

McQuinn

, et al. Inaccurate point-of-care blood glucose measurement in a dog with secondary erythrocytosis. J Vet Emerg Crit Care 2019;30:81–85.

19.

National Marine Fisheries Service Southeast Fisheries Science Center. Sea turtle research techniques manual, 2008. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SEFSC-579. https://repository.library.noaa.gov/view/noaa/3626

20.

Paul

AEH

, et al. Effect of hematocrit on accuracy of two point-of-care glucometers for use in dogs. Am J Vet Res 2011;72:1204–1208.

21.

Perrault

, et al. Blood analytes of immature Kemp’s ridley sea turtles (Lepidochelys kempii) from an in-water study in the southeastern United States: reference intervals and size-relevant correlations. Conserv Physiol 2020;8:coaa091.

22.

Perrault

, et al. Comparison of whole blood and plasma glucose concentrations in green turtles (Chelonia mydas) determined using a glucometer and a dry chemistry analyzer. J Wildl Dis 2018;54:196–199.

23.

Selleri

, et al. Performance of two portable meters and a benchtop analyzer for blood glucose concentration measurement in rabbits. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2014;245:87–98.

24.

Snoddy

, et al. Blood biochemistry of sea turtles captured in gillnets in the lower Cape Fear River, North Carolina, USA. J Wildl Manage 2009;73:1394–1401.

25.

Stacy

Innis

. Clinical pathology. In: Manire

, et al., eds. Sea Turtle Health and Rehabilitation. J. Ross Publishing, 2017:147–207.

26.

Stoot

, et al. Use of portable blood physiology point-of-care devices for basic and applied research on vertebrates: a review. Conserv Physiol 2014;2:cou011.

27.

Tang

, et al. Effects of different hematocrit levels on glucose measurements with handheld meters for point-of-care testing. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2000;124:1135–1140.

28.

Wess

Reusch

Assessment of five portable blood glucose meters for use in cats. Am J Vet Res 2000;61:1587–1592.

29.

Wess

Reusch

Evaluation of five portable blood glucose meters for use in dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2000;16:203–209.

30.

Wibbels

Bevan

Kemp’s ridley: Lepidochelys kempii. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2019:e.T11533A142050590. [cited 2020 Jan 15]. http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2019-2.RLTS.T11533A142050590.en

31.

Wolf

, et al. Evaluation of five clinical chemistry analyzers for use in health assessment in sea turtles. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2008;233:470–475.