Recommendation on an updated standardization of serum magnesium reference ranges.

PURPOSE: Serum magnesium is the most frequently used laboratory test for evaluating clinical magnesium status. Hypomagnesemia (low magnesium status), which is associated with many chronic diseases, is diagnosed using the serum magnesium reference range. Currently, no international consensus for a magnesemia normal range exists. Two independent groups designated 0.85 mmol/L (2.07 mg/dL; 1.7 mEq/L) as the low cut-off point defining hypomagnesemia. MaGNet discussions revealed differences in serum magnesium reference ranges used by members' hospitals and laboratories, presenting an urgent need for standardization. METHODS: We gathered and compared serum magnesium reference range values from our institutions, hospitals, and colleagues worldwide. RESULTS: Serum magnesium levels designating "hypomagnesemia" differ widely. Of 43 collected values, only 2 met 0.85 mmol/L as the low cut-off point to define hypomagnesemia. The remainder had lower cut-off values, which may underestimate hypomagnesemia diagnosis in hospital, clinical, and research assessments. Current serum magnesium reference ranges stem from "normal" populations, which unknowingly include persons with chronic latent magnesium deficit (CLMD). Serum magnesium levels of patients with CLMD fall within widely used "normal" ranges, but their magnesium status is too low for long-term health. The lower serum magnesium reference (0.85 mmol/L) proposed specifically prevents the inclusion of patients with CLMD. CONCLUSIONS: Widely varying serum magnesium reference ranges render our use of this important medical tool imprecise, minimizing impacts of low magnesium status or hypomagnesemia as a marker of disease risk. To appropriately diagnose, increase awareness of, and manage magnesium status, it is critical to standardize lower reference values for serum magnesium at 0.85 mmol/L (2.07 mg/dL; 1.7 mEq/L).

The status of serum vitamin D in patients attending a general rheumatology clinic in the UK.

Vitamin D deficiency may be involved in the pathogenesis of several inflammatory conditions. This study aimed to determine the status of vitamin D in the rheumatology patients who were diagnosed with different rheumatic, inflammatory and non-inflammatory diseases. In this cross-sectional observational study, we reviewed the levels of serum vitamin D in patients who attended the general rheumatology clinics for the first time between May 2012 and October 2012. A total of 61 patients were included in this study. Twenty-five patients (41 %) had vitamin D insufficiency and two patients (3.3 %) were vitamin D deficient. Sixteen patients had an inflammatory condition and vitamin D was low in five patients (31 %). Among the 45 patients who had a non-inflammatory rheumatic condition, 20 patients (44 %) had low vitamin D. There was no significant statistical difference (P = 0.3) in the incidence of low vitamin D between the two groups. We found no significant correlation either between CRP and vitamin D (r = -0.02 (95 % confidence interval -0.28 to 0.23), P = 0.8). In this limited study, which was undertaken in the summer months, we concluded that there was no significant difference in vitamin D status between patients with inflammatory and non-inflammatory rheumatic conditions.

Biological variation of vitamins in blood of healthy individuals.

BACKGROUND: Components of biological variation can be used to define objective quality specifications (imprecision, bias, and total error), to assess the usefulness of reference values [index of individuality (II)], and to evaluate significance of changes in serial results from an individual [reference change value (RCV)]. However, biological variation data on vitamins in blood are limited. The aims of the present study were to determine the intra- and interindividual biological variation of vitamins A, E, B(1), B(2), B(6), C, and K and carotenoids in plasma, whole blood, or erythrocytes from apparently healthy persons and to define quality specifications for vitamin measurements based on their biology. METHODS: Fasting plasma, whole blood, and erythrocytes were collected from 14 healthy volunteers at regular weekly intervals over 22 weeks. Vitamins were measured by HPLC. From the data generated, the intra- (CV(I)) and interindividual (CV(G)) biological CVs were estimated for each vitamin. Derived quality specifications, II, and RCV were calculated from CV(I) and CV(G). RESULTS: CV(I) was 4.8%-38% and CV(G) was 10%-65% for the vitamins measured. The CV(I)s for vitamins A, E, B(1), and B(2) were lower (4.8%-7.6%) than for the other vitamins in blood. For all vitamins, CV(G) was higher than CV(I), with II <1.0 (range, 0.36-0.95). The RCVs for vitamins were high (15.8%-108%). Apart from vitamins A, B(1), and erythrocyte B(2), the imprecision of our methods for measurement of vitamins in blood was within the desirable goal. CONCLUSIONS: For most vitamin measurements in plasma, whole blood, or erythrocytes, the desirable imprecision goals based on biological variation are obtainable by current methodologies. Population reference intervals for vitamins are of limited value in demonstrating deficiency or excess.