Literature DB >> 27683272

Plasma sodium measurements by direct ion selective methods in laboratory and point of care may not be clinically interchangeable.

Brigit A Weld1, Thomas J Morgan2,3, Jeffrey J Presneill4, Steven Weier5, David Cowley6.   

Abstract

An estimated 25 % of indirect ion selective electrode (ISE) ICU plasma sodium measurements differ from corresponding direct ISE values by at least 4 mmol/L, the dominant factor being indirect ISE over-estimation driven by hypoproteinemia. Since direct measurements are considered unaffected by protein concentrations, we investigated whether direct ISE plasma sodium measurements in the laboratory and at point of care in ICU show sufficient agreement to be clinically interchangeable. From a 5 year clinical chemistry database, 9910 ICU plasma samples were assessed for agreement between direct ISE sodium measurements in ICU (ABL 700) and in the central laboratory (Vitros Fusion). The relationship between differences in paired plasma sodium measurements (Vitros-ABL) and total plasma protein concentrations was evaluated by generalized estimating equation linear regression. Patients were hypo-proteinemic [mean (SD) total protein concentration 56.9 (9.04) g/L]. Mean (SD) paired Vitros-ABL sodium measurements was -0.087 (1.74) mmol/L, range -14 to +10 mmol/L. Disagreement at ≥|4|mmol/L, ≥|3|mmol/L and ≥|2|mmol/L was present in 409 (4.1 %), 1333 (13.4 %) and 3591 (36.2 %) pairs respectively. Test-retest disagreement estimates within either source alone were substantially lower. Small negative Vitros-ABL differences associated with low plasma protein concentrations were reversed at high protein concentrations. Disagreement between plasma sodium concentrations monitored by two common direct ISE analyzers was substantially less than reported between direct and indirect ISE devices, although a protein influence of low clinical importance persisted. Disagreement was sufficient to jeopardize safe interchangeable interpretation in situations with a low tolerance for imprecision, such as hyponatremia correction.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Accuracy; Data; Data quality; Direct ion selective; Instrumentation; Ion selective electrodes; Measurement; Protein; Sodium; Test–retest reliability

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27683272     DOI: 10.1007/s10877-016-9938-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput        ISSN: 1387-1307            Impact factor:   2.502


  20 in total

1.  Recommendations for measurement of and conventions for reporting sodium and potassium by ion-selective electrodes in undiluted serum, plasma or whole blood. International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (IFCC). IFCC Scientific Division Working Group on Selective Electrodes.

Authors:  R W Burnett; A K Covington; N Fogh-Andersen; W R Külpmann; A Lewenstam; A H Maas; O Müller-Plathe; C Sachs; O Siggaard-Andersen; A L VanKessel; W G Zijlstra
Journal:  Clin Chem Lab Med       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 3.694

2.  Effect of low protein concentration on serum sodium measurement: pseudohypernatraemia and pseudonormonatraemia!

Authors:  T Lang; P Prinsloo; A F Broughton; N Lawson; C B Marenah
Journal:  Ann Clin Biochem       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 2.057

3.  Disagreement between ion selective electrode direct and indirect sodium measurements: estimation of the problem in a tertiary referral hospital.

Authors:  Goce Dimeski; Thomas J Morgan; Jeffrey J Presneill; Balasubramanian Venkatesh
Journal:  J Crit Care       Date:  2012-01-09       Impact factor: 3.425

4.  Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.

Authors:  J M Bland; D G Altman
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1986-02-08       Impact factor: 79.321

5.  Pseudohyponatremia.

Authors:  T C Aw; F L Kiechle
Journal:  Am J Emerg Med       Date:  1985-05       Impact factor: 2.469

6.  Variance components of serum constituents in healthy individuals.

Authors:  A C Van Steirteghem; E A Robertson; D S Young
Journal:  Clin Chem       Date:  1978-02       Impact factor: 8.327

Review 7.  Metrological traceability in clinical biochemistry.

Authors:  Graham H White
Journal:  Ann Clin Biochem       Date:  2011-07-27       Impact factor: 2.057

8.  Comparison of the point-of-care blood gas analyzer versus the laboratory auto-analyzer for the measurement of electrolytes.

Authors:  Anunaya Jain; Imron Subhan; Mahesh Joshi
Journal:  Int J Emerg Med       Date:  2009-02-24

Review 9.  The treatment of hyponatremia.

Authors:  Richard H Sterns; Sagar U Nigwekar; John Kevin Hix
Journal:  Semin Nephrol       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 5.299

10.  Use of a blood gas analyzer and a laboratory autoanalyzer in routine practice to measure electrolytes in intensive care unit patients.

Authors:  Yasemin U Budak; Kagan Huysal; Murat Polat
Journal:  BMC Anesthesiol       Date:  2012-08-03       Impact factor: 2.217

View more
  3 in total

1.  Comparison of a modified Story approach to traditional evaluation of acid-base disturbances in patients with shock: a cohort study.

Authors:  Matheus Golenia Dos Passos; Luciana Bergamini Blaya; Márcio Manozzo Boniatti
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2021-05-02       Impact factor: 1.977

2.  Agreement of Potassium, Sodium, Glucose, and Hemoglobin Measured by Blood Gas Analyzer With Dry Chemistry Analyzer and Complete Blood Count Analyzer: A Two-Center Retrospective Analysis.

Authors:  Hongxiang Xie; Shiyu Lv; Sufeng Chen; Zhenzhen Pang; Deli Ye; Jianzhuang Guo; Wanju Xu; Weidong Jin
Journal:  Front Med (Lausanne)       Date:  2022-04-01

3.  Clinical factors within a week of birth influencing sodium level difference between an arterial blood gas analyzer and an autoanalyzer in VLBWIs: A retrospective study.

Authors:  Hyun Ho Kim; Jin Kyu Kim
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2021-12-10       Impact factor: 1.817

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.