Artefactually low creatinine by Beckman Coulter enzymatic method due to immunoglobulin M paraprotein interference

An 81-year-old man was admitted to hospital with symptomatic coronavirus disease (COVID-19) infection. He had a background of progressive chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy associated with Waldenstrom's macroglobulinaemia. His plasma creatinine on four separate samples was inconceivably low (all ≤13 μmol/L), as measured by a Beckman Coulter enzymatic assay) after being 72 μmol/L 3 months earlier. On further investigation, his serum immunoglobulin M (IgM) was 15.4 g/L and his plasma creatinine measured by Roche enzymatic and Roche Jaffe methods was 62 μmol/L and 64 μmol/L, respectively. This was consistent with results post dilution studies and polyethylene glycol (PEG) precipitation on the Beckman Coulter assay. There was no evidence of similar interference when reviewing creatinine results from 10 other patients with IgM paraproteinaemia who had been tested in our laboratory. Clinicians and laboratorians are reminded that enzymatic creatinine is not free from interferences. IgM paraprotein negative interference of enzymatic creatinine is rare and specific to a patient's IgM and assay combination, but should be considered in patients with an unexplained low enzymatic creatinine result. Useful investigations to identify an interference include dilution studies, PEG precipitation and measuring creatinine on an alternative method such as Jaffe, mass spectrometry or an enzymatic method from a different platform.

Lithium heparin interference in the Abbott enzymatic creatinine assay: the significance of under-filled tubes

BACKGROUND

Spuriously high results using the Abbott Architect enzymatic creatinine assay were noted to be particularly associated with very small sample volumes. This led us to query the effect of under-filling lithium heparin tubes on the measured enzymatic creatinine result.

METHODS

Blood was provided by 5 laboratory personnel and then decanted into 5 x1.2 mL Sarstedt S-Monovette tubes, giving final blood volumes of 200, 400, 600, 800 and 1200 μL. Plasma was analysed using Abbott Architect Jaffe, enzymatic creatinine, Beckman Coulter (AU500) enzymatic creatinine and Roche (Cobas c702) enzymatic creatinine assays. Saline was also added to Sarstedt 1.2 mL and Teklab 2 mL tubes and analysed using the Abbott Jaffe and enzymatic creatinine methods.

RESULTS

Increasing degrees of under-fill were associated with greater over-estimation of creatinine using the Abbott enzymatic assay, but no difference was noted using Jaffe methodology on the same platform or enzymatic assays provided by Roche or Beckman. On average, creatinine was 40.6% (+27.7 μmol/L) higher when only 200 μL of blood was present in the tube. Small volumes of saline added to lithium heparin tubes measured significant creatinine concentrations using the Abbott enzymatic method.

CONCLUSIONS

Lithium heparin directly interferes in the Abbott Architect enzymatic creatinine assay. Under-filling lithium heparin tubes can lead to clinically significant over-estimation of creatinine results by this assay. Users of this assay should be aware of the potential for spurious results in small sample volumes collected into lithium heparin tubes and implement robust procedures for identifying and reporting results on these samples.