Preanalytical investigations of phlebotomy: methodological aspects, pitfalls and recommendations

Blood alcohol concentration in the clinical laboratory: a narrative review of the preanalytical phase in diagnostic and forensic testing

The analysis of blood alcohol concentration (BAC), a pivotal toxicological test, concerns acute alcohol intoxication (AAI) and driving under the influence (DUI). As such, BAC presents an organizational challenge for clinical laboratories, with unique complexities due to the need for forensic defensibility as part of the diagnostic process. Unfortunately, a significant number of scientific investigations dealing with the subject present discrepancies that make it difficult to identify optimal practices in sample collection, transportation, handling, and preparation. This review provides a systematic analysis of the preanalytical phase of BAC that aims to identify and explain the chemical, physiological, and pharmacological mechanisms underlying controllable operational factors. Nevertheless, it seeks evidence for the necessity to separate preanalytical processes for diagnostic and forensic BAC testing. In this regard, the main finding of this review is that no literature evidence supports the necessity to differentiate preanalytical procedures for AAI and DUI, except for the traceability throughout the chain of custody. In fact, adhering to correct preanalytical procedures provided by official bodies such as European federation of clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine for routine phlebotomy ensures both diagnostic accuracy and forensic defensibility of BAC. This is shown to depend on the capability of modern pre-evacuated sterile collection tubes to control major factors influencing BAC, namely non-enzymatic oxidation and microbial contamination. While certain restrictions become obsolete with such devices, as the use of sodium fluoride (NaF) for specific preservation of forensic BAC, this review reinforces the recommendation to use non-alcoholic disinfectants as a means to achieve "error-proof" procedures in challenging operational environments like the emergency department.

Coffee intake one hour prior to phlebotomy produces no clinically significant changes in routine biochemical test results

Introduction

Although current guidelines recommend not drinking coffee prior to phlebotomy, our hypothesis is that drinking coffee does not affect the clinical interpretation of biochemical and haematological test results.

Materials and methods

Twenty-seven volunteers were studied in basal state (T0) and 1h after (T1) drinking coffee. Routine haematological (Sysmex-XN1000 analyser) and biochemistry parameters (Vitros 4600 analyser) were studied. Results were compared using the Wilcoxon test (P < 0.05). A clinical change was considered when mean percent difference (MD%) was higher than the reference change value (RCV).

Results

Coffee intake produced statistically, but not clinically, significant: i) increases in haemoglobin (P = 0.009), mean cell haemoglobin concentration (P = 0.044), neutrophils (P = 0.001), albumin (P = 0.001), total protein (P = 0.000), cholesterol (P = 0.025), high density lipoprotein cholesterol (P = 0.007), uric acid (P = 0.011), calcium (P = 0.001), potassium (P = 0.010), aspartate aminotransferase (P = 0.001), amylase (P = 0.026), and lactate dehydrogenase (P = 0.001), and ii) decreases in mean cell volume (P = 0.002), red cell distribution width (P = 0.001), eosinophils (P = 0.002), and lymphocytes (P = 0.001), creatinine (P = 0.001), total bilirubin (P = 0.012), phosphorus (P = 0.001), magnesium (P = 0.007), and chloride (P = 0.001).

Conclusion

Drinking a cup of coffee 1 hour prior to phlebotomy produces no clinically significant changes in routine biochemical and haematological test results.

Can chewing gum be another source of preanalytical variability in fasting outpatients?

INTRODUCTION

In the daily laboratory practice, there are patients coming to blood collection sites chewing sugar-free gum, considering it irrelevant to laboratory tests. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether a sugar-free chewing gum can interfere with laboratory tests.

METHODS

We studied 22 healthy volunteers. After a 12-hour overnight fasting, the first blood sample was collected between 8:00 and 8:30 a.m. Then, immediately after the first venous blood collection, the subjects started chewing the gum (declared sugar-free) for 20 min. Subsequent venous blood samples were collected at 1, 2, and 4 hours after chewing the gum. Significant differences between samples were assessed by the Wilcoxon ranked-pairs test.

RESULTS

Among all the results, statistically significant differences (p < 0.05) between basal and × hours after chewing sugar-free gum were observed for the following parameters: cortisol, insulin, C-peptide, triglycerides, uric acid, urea, amylase, alanine aminotransferase, lipase, creatine kinase, total bilirubin, direct bilirubin, phosphate, iron, potassium, thyroid stimulating hormone, red blood cell count, hematocrit, hemoglobin, mean cell volume, red cell distribution width, white blood cell count, lymphocytes, neutrophils, and eosinophils; whereas, coagulation tests were not impacted by chewing sugar-free gum.

CONCLUSIONS

We recommend instructing the patients to avoid the use of chewing gum before blood collection for laboratory tests.

Fasting conditions: Influence of water intake on clinical chemistry analytes

Introduction

Currently available recommendations regarding fasting requirements before phlebotomy do not specify any maximum water intake volume permitted during the fasting period. The aim was to study the effects of 300 mL water intake 1 h before phlebotomy on specific analytes.

Materials and methods

Blood was collected from 20 women (median age (min-max): 24 (22 - 50) years) in basal state (T₀) and 1 h after 300 mL water intake (T₁). Glucose, total proteins (TP), urea, creatinine, cystatin C, total bilirubin (BT), total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides (Tg), uric acid (UA), high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT), aspartate-aminotransferase (AST), alanine-aminotransferase and lactate-dehydrogenase (LD) were studied. Results were analyzed using Wilcoxon test. Mean difference (%) was calculated for each analyte and was further compared with reference change value (RCV). Only mean differences (%) higher than RCV were considered clinically significant.

Results

Significant differences (median T₀vs median T₁, P) were observed for TP (73 vs 74 g/L, 0.001); urea (4.08 vs 4.16 mmol/L, 0.010); BT (12 vs 13 µmol/L, 0.021); total cholesterol (4.9 vs 4.9 mmol/L, 0.042); Tg (1.05 vs 1.06 mmol/L, 0.002); UA (260 vs 270 µmol/L, 0.006); GGT (12 vs 12 U/L, 0.046); AST (22 vs 24 U/L, 0.001); and LD (364 vs 386 U/L, 0.001). Although the differences observed were statistically significant, they were not indicative of clinically significant changes.

Conclusions

A water intake of 300 mL 1 h prior to phlebotomy does not interfere with the analytes studied in the present work.

Case report of unexplained hypocalcaemia in a slightly haemolysed sample

The case presented highlights a common pre-analytical problem identified in the laboratory that was initially missed. It concerns a young, generally healthy adult patient with no significant medical history and no significant family history. They presented with common flu like symptoms to their primary care clinician who considered this was most likely a viral problem that would pass with time. The clinician, however, did some routine bloods to reassure the patient despite a lack of clinical indication. When the sample was analysed the sample was haemolysed with strikingly low calcium. This led to the patient being called into hospital for urgent repeat investigations, all of which turned out to be within normal ranges. On further investigation the original sample was found to be contaminated. This result would normally have been flagged but was missed due to the complication of haemolysis.