Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter July 25, 2019

Integrity of serum samples is changed by modified centrifugation conditions

Marijana Miler EMAIL logo , Nora Nikolac Gabaj , Jelena Culej , Adriana Unic , Alen Vrtaric and Lara Milevoj Kopcinovic

Abstract

Background

Serum samples should be centrifuged for at least 10 min at 1300–2500 × g. Changed centrifugation conditions could compromise sample quality. The objective of this study was to compare the serum quality and turnaround time (TAT) using different centrifugation conditions.

Methods

The study was done in four different periods (A, B, C and D) at different conditions: for 10, 5 and 7 (A, B and C, respectively) at 2876 × g, and 7 (D) min at 4141 × g. Sample quality was assessed as the proportion of samples with: (a) aspiration errors, (b) H index >0.5 g/L and (c) suppressed reports of potassium (K) due to hemolysis. TAT was calculated for emergency samples. The proportions of samples (a), (b) and (c) were compared according to period A.

Results

The number of aspiration errors was significantly higher in samples centrifuged at 2876 × g for 5 min (p = 0.021) and remained unchanged when centrifuged for 7 min (p = 0.066 and 0.177, for periods C and D, respectively). In periods B, C and D, the proportion of samples with hemolysis was higher than that in period A (p-values 0.039, 0.009 and 0.042, respectively). TAT differed between all periods (p < 0.001), with the lowest TAT observed for B and D. The lowest number of samples exceeding 60-min TAT was observed in period D (p = 0.011).

Conclusions

The integrity of serum samples is changed with different centrifugation conditions than those recommended. Our study showed that shorter centrifugation at higher force (7 min at 4141 × g) significantly decreases TAT, with unchanged proportion of samples with aspiration errors.

  1. Author contributions: All the authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this submitted manuscript and approved submission.

  2. Research funding: None declared.

  3. Employment or leadership: None declared.

  4. Honorarium: None declared.

  5. Competing interests: The funding organization(s) played no role in the study design; in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; or in the decision to submit the report for publication.

References

1. Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute. Procedures for the Handling and Processing of Blood Specimens for Common Laboratory Tests; Approved Guideline – Third Edition. Wayne, PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, 2004. CLSI document H18-A3.Search in Google Scholar

2. Greiner Bio-One. Vacuette blood collection system – handling recommendations. 980183 rev 05, February 2016. http://www.gbo.com/preanalytics. Accessed: 25 Feb 2019.Search in Google Scholar

3. Becton Dickinson. BD Diagnostics – Preanalytical Systems. 2009. https://www.bd.com/resource.aspx?IDX=10155. Accessed: 25 Feb 2019.Search in Google Scholar

4. World Health Organization. Use of anticoagulants in diagnostic laboratory investigations, 2nd ed. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2002.Search in Google Scholar

5. Holland LL, DomBourian MD. Evaluation of an abbreviated centrifugation protocol for chemistry testing. Lab Med 2012;43:78–81.10.1309/LM920FFGFXLRAORQSearch in Google Scholar

6. Koenders MM, van Hurne ME, Glasmacher-Van Zijl M. The analytic impact of a reduced centrifugation step on chemistry and immunochemistry assays: an evaluation of the modular pre-analytics. Ann Clin Biochem 2012;49:468–74.10.1258/acb.2012.011233Search in Google Scholar PubMed

7. Minder EI, Schibli A, Mahrer D. Effects of different centrifugation conditions on clinical chemistry and Immunology test results. BMC Clin Pathol 2011;11:6.10.1186/1472-6890-11-6Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

8. Cadamuro J, Mrazek C, Leichtle AB, Kipman U, Felder TK, Wiedemann H, et al. Influence of centrifugation conditions on the results of 77 routine clinical chemistry analytes using standard vacuum blood collection tubes and the new BD-Barricor tubes. Biochem Med (Zagreb) 2018;28:010704.10.11613/BM.2018.010704Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

9. Boyanton BL, Blick KE. Stability studies of twenty-four analytes in human plasma and serum. Clin Chem 2002;48:2242–7.10.1093/clinchem/48.12.2242Search in Google Scholar

10. Dikmen ZG, Pinar A, Akbiyik F. Specimen rejection in laboratory medicine: necessary for patient safety? Biochem Med (Zagreb) 2015;25:377–85.10.11613/BM.2015.037Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

11. Lippi G, Salvagno GL, Montagnana M, Franchini M, Guidi GC. Phlebotomy issues and quality improvement in results of laboratory testing. Clin Lab 2006;52:217–30.Search in Google Scholar

12. Ko DH, Won D, Jeong TD, Lee W, Chun S, Min W-K. Comparison of red blood cell hemolysis using plasma and serum separation tubes for outpatient specimens. Ann Lab Med 2015;35:194–7.10.3343/alm.2015.35.2.194Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

13. Kazmierczak SC, Sekhon H, Richards C. False-positive troponin I measured with the Abbott AxSYM attributed to fibrin interference. Int J Cardiol 2005;101:27–31.10.1016/j.ijcard.2004.03.008Search in Google Scholar PubMed

14. Carey RN, Jani C, Johnson C, Pearce J, Hui-Ng P, Lacson E. Chemistry testing on plasma versus serum samples in dialysis patients: clinical and quality improvement implications. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2016;11:1675–9.10.2215/CJN.09310915Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

15. Luksic AH, Nikolac Gabaj N, Miler M, Dukic L, Bakliza A, Simundic AM. Visual assessment of hemolysis affects patient safety. Clin Chem Lab Med 2018;56:574–81.10.1515/cclm-2017-0532Search in Google Scholar PubMed

16. Conover WJ. Practical nonparametric statistics, 3rd ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1999.Search in Google Scholar

17. Lippi G, Cadamuro J, von Meyer A, Simundic AM; European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Working Group for Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE). Practical recommendations for managing hemolyzed samples in clinical chemistry testing. Clin Chem Lab Med 2018;56:718–27.10.1515/cclm-2017-1104Search in Google Scholar PubMed

18. Lippi G, von Meyer A, Cadamuro J, Simundic AM. Blood sample quality. Diagnosis (Berl) 2019;6:25–31.10.1515/dx-2018-0018Search in Google Scholar PubMed

19. Barnard EB, Potter DL, Ayling RM, Higginson I, Bailey AG, Smith JE. Factors affecting blood sample haemolysis: a cross-sectional study. Eur J Emerg Med 2016;23:143–6.10.1097/MEJ.0000000000000195Search in Google Scholar PubMed

20. Heireman L, Van Geel P, Musger L, Heylen E, Uyttenbroeck W, Mahieu B. Causes, consequences and management of sample hemolysis in the clinical laboratory. Clin Biochem 2017;50:1317–22.10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2017.09.013Search in Google Scholar PubMed

21. Monneret D, Corlouer C, Bigot J, Atlan G, Alkouri R, Mestari F, et al. Comparison of a 10- vs. 15-min centrifugation time for chemical and immunochemical assays and impact on turnaround time in a hospital laboratory. Clin Chem Lab Med 2016;54:e117–21.10.1515/cclm-2015-0664Search in Google Scholar PubMed

22. Møller MF, Søndergaard TR, Kristensen HT, Münster AB. Evaluation of a reduced centrifugation time and higher centrifugal force on various general chemistry and immunochemistry analytes in plasma and serum. Ann Clin Biochem 2017;54:593–600.10.1177/0004563216674030Search in Google Scholar PubMed

23. Cervellin G, Aloe R, Lippi G. A case of factitious hyponatremia and hypokalemia due to the presence of fibrin gel in serum. Diagnosis 2015;2:73–4.10.1515/dx-2014-0067Search in Google Scholar PubMed

24. Beyne P, Vigier JP, Bourgoin P, Vidaud M. Comparison of single and repeat centrifugation of blood specimens collected in BD evacuated blood collection tubes containing a clot activator for cardiac troponin I assay on the ACCESS analyzer. Clin Chem 2000;46:1869–70.10.1093/clinchem/46.11.1869Search in Google Scholar

25. Lima-Oliveira G, Monneret D, Guerber F, Guidi GC. Sample management for clinical biochemistry assays: Are serum and plasma interchangeable specimens? Crit Rev Clin Lab Sci 2018;55:480–500.10.1080/10408363.2018.1499708Search in Google Scholar PubMed

26. Hira K, Shimbo T, Fukui T. High serum potassium concentrations after recentrifugation of stored blood specimens. N Engl J Med 2000;343:153–4.10.1056/NEJM200007133430219Search in Google Scholar PubMed

27. Canovi S, Campioli D, Marcheselli L. Specimen recentrifugation and elevated troponin I levels. Lab Med 2015;46:47–50.10.1309/LMPC95EL4PYEWWBRSearch in Google Scholar PubMed

28. Woodworth A, Pyle AL. Chapter 4 – Sample Processing and Specimen Misidentification Issues. In: Dasgupta A, Sepulveda JL, editors. Accurate results in the Clinical Laboratory. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier, 2013:35–51.10.1016/B978-0-12-415783-5.00004-9Search in Google Scholar

29. Miler M, Nikolac Gabaj N, Dukic L, Simundic AM. Key performance indicators to measure improvement after implementation of total laboratory automation Abbott Accelerator a3600. J Med Syst 2018;42:28.10.1007/s10916-017-0878-1Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Received: 2019-03-04
Accepted: 2019-06-17
Published Online: 2019-07-25
Published in Print: 2019-11-26

© 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 28.11.2022 from frontend.live.degruyter.dgbricks.com/document/doi/10.1515/cclm-2019-0244/html
Scroll Up Arrow