Removing Lipemia in Serum/Plasma Samples: A Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: Lipemia, a significant source of analytical errors in clinical laboratory settings, should be removed prior to measuring biochemical parameters. We investigated whether lipemia in serum/plasma samples can be removed using a method that is easier and more practicable than ultracentrifugation, the current reference method. METHODS: Seven hospital laboratories in Spain participated in this study. We first compared the effectiveness of ultracentrifugation (108,200×g) and high-speed centrifugation (10,000×g for 15 minutes) in removing lipemia. Second, we compared high-speed centrifugation with two liquid-liquid extraction methods-LipoClear (StatSpin, Norwood, USA), and 1,1,2-trichlorotrifluoroethane (Merck, Darmstadt, Germany). We assessed 14 biochemical parameters: serum/plasma concentrations of sodium ion, potassium ion, chloride ion, glucose, total protein, albumin, creatinine, urea, alkaline phosphatase, gamma-glutamyl transferase, alanine aminotransferase, aspartate-aminotransferase, calcium, and bilirubin. We analyzed whether the differences between lipemia removal methods exceeded the limit for clinically significant interference (LCSI). RESULTS: When ultracentrifugation and high-speed centrifugation were compared, no parameter had a difference that exceeded the LCSI. When high-speed centrifugation was compared with the two liquid-liquid extraction methods, we found differences exceeding the LCSI in protein, calcium, and aspartate aminotransferase in the comparison with 1,1,2-trichlorotrifluoroethane, and in protein, albumin, and calcium in the comparison with LipoClear. Differences in other parameters did not exceed the LCSI. CONCLUSIONS: High-speed centrifugation (10,000×g for 15 minutes) can be used instead of ultracentrifugation to remove lipemia in serum/plasma samples. LipoClear and 1,1,2-trichlorotrifluoroethane are unsuitable as they interfere with the measurement of certain parameters.

Multicentric evaluation of the homogeneous LDL-cholesterol Plus assay: comparison with beta-quantification and Friedewald formula.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the analytical and clinical performance of a new version of the LDL-C Plus assay and compare it with the beta-quantification (BQ) method in a multicenter study. DESIGN AND METHODS: Direct LDL-C was measured in 169 fresh pooled samples and in 830 clinical samples with known LDL-C by BQ. The reactivity of lipoproteins and the effect of hemoglobin, bilirubin and chylomicrons (CM) were studied. RESULTS: Direct LDL-C total imprecision was <2.2%; inaccuracy <+/-2.5% (unaffected by triglycerides up to 9.5 mmol/L); and total error 9.8%. Direct assay reacted with 95%, 50% and 25% of the cholesterol in the LDL, intermediate (IDL) and VLDL fractions, respectively. A significant association was observed with BQ. Icteric samples showed a negative bias and the effect of CM was variable. A positive bias was observed when VLDL-cholesterol/triglyceride ratio was >0.57. CONCLUSIONS: LDL-C Plus assay represents a valid alternative to BQ for clinical laboratories.