ArticlePloS one2026
Evaluation of UNI-VAC serum separator, ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid, sodium citrate, and sodium fluoride tubes: A comparison with Becton, Dickinson and Company Vacutainer tubes.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Errors in the preanalytical phase are influenced by several factors, including blood collection tubes. Labex, Inc. has developed UNI-VAC tubes using a separation gel formulated with fatty acid acrylamide to enhance stability. We aimed to compare the performance of the UNI-VAC tubes with Becton, Dickinson and Company Vacutainer tubes for 53 analytes. Forty adult outpatients were prospectively enrolled in the comparison study, and an additional 20 participants were included to evaluate lot-to-lot variability. Four UNI-VAC tube types (serum separator, ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid [EDTA], sodium citrate, and sodium fluoride) were compared with their Vacutainer counterparts. Comparative performance was evaluated using Passing-Bablok regression and bias criteria from the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine Biological Variation Database and Westgard specifications. Stability was assessed for EDTA tubes at 24 h and sodium fluoride tubes at 24-72 h (4°C storage). The lot-to-lot variability of the EDTA tubes was examined across the three UNI-VAC and two Vacutainer lots. Fifty (94%) analytes met the predefined acceptability criteria. Lactate dehydrogenase (-4.3%), mean corpuscular volume (1.5%), and mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration (-1.0%) marginally exceeded these limits, although the differences were small and unlikely to be clinically significant. No visible gel instability or other visible tube-related issues were observed. EDTA tubes demonstrated stability after 24 h, although the basophil percentages and platelet indices showed reduced consistency. Glucose values were stable for up to 48 h but declined at 72 h in both tubes. The lot-to-lot variability of the UNI-VAC EDTA tubes was comparable to that of the Vacutainer tubes. UNI-VAC tubes show a clinical performance equivalent to that of Vacutainer tubes for most analytes, with acceptable stability. These findings indicate that UNI-VAC tubes represent a reliable alternative for clinical laboratory use, with further validation in larger patient cohorts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.