Accessible Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter August 22, 2015

Between analyser differences in chloride measurements and thus anion gap cause different interpretations of the acid-base balance

Nienke Geerts, Nick Wlazlo and Volkher Scharnhorst

Corresponding author: Nienke Geerts, Catharina Hospital, Department of Clinical Chemistry, Michelangelolaan 2 Eindhoven 5602 ZA, The Netherlands, Phone: +31 402398638, E-mail:

References

1. Berend K, De Vries AP, Gans RO. Physiological approach to assessment of acid-base disturbances. N Engl J Med 2014;371:1434–45. Search in Google Scholar

2. Adrogue HJ, Gennari FJ, Galla JH, Madias NE. Assessing acid-base disorders. Kidney Int 2009;76:1239–47. Search in Google Scholar

3. Kraut JA, Madias NE. Serum anion gap: its uses and limitations in clinical medicine. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2007;2:162–74. Search in Google Scholar

4. Ben Rayana MC, Burnett RW, Covington AK, D’Orazio P, Fogh-Andersen N, Jacobs E, et al. Recommendation for measuring and reporting chloride by ISEs in undiluted serum, plasma or blood. International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (IFCC). IFCC Scientific Division, Committee on Point of Care Testing and Working Group on Selective Electrodes. Clin Chem Lab Med 2006;44:346–52. Search in Google Scholar

5. Morimatsu H, Rocktaschel J, Bellomo R, Uchino S, Goldsmith D, Gutteridge G. Comparison of point-of-care versus central laboratory measurement of electrolyte concentrations on calculations of the anion gap and the strong ion difference. Anesthesiology 2003;98:1077–84. Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2015-5-19
Accepted: 2015-7-24
Published Online: 2015-8-22
Published in Print: 2016-3-1

©2016 by De Gruyter