Should a patient with a hematocrit greater than 55 percent be redrawn for correction always or only when prothrombin time and partial prothrombin time are elevated?
A. Accurate hemostasis and
thrombosis results rely heavily on proper collection and processing
(preanalytic phase) of the citrated blood specimen. Guidelines from many
sources, including the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute,1
indicate that blood collection into nonactivating containers (e.g.
polypropylene plastic or silicone-coated glass) with proper
blood-to-anticoagulant ratio is required. Trisodium citrate tubes are
available in a 3.2 percent or 3.8 percent concentration. A laboratory
should choose a single concentration and not use the two citrate
concentrations interchangeably.2 The World Health Organization and the
CLSI recommend using 3.2 percent sodium citrate (105–109 nm/L), as the
thromboplastin International Sensitivity Index values applied in the INR
calculation are based on specimens collected in 3.2 percent citrate.2,3
The
proper blood-to-anticoagulant ratio, commonly referred to as the “fill
volume,” results in a 9:1 ratio of blood to anticoagulant. Underfilled
tubes, defined as less than 90 percent of the fill volume, may result in
prolongation of calcium-dependent, clot-based testing such as the PT
and activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) assays. Citrate’s
anticoagulant effect is due to chelation of calcium in the specimen.
When calcium is unavailable, coagulation cannot occur. During the
analytic testing phase, a premeasured amount of calcium is added back,
which allows coagulation to occur. If the citrate anticoagulant
concentration is too high, the amount of calcium available during the
testing phase is decreased, and the resulting time to clot formation is
prolonged.
Underfilled sodium citrate tube. Citrate
distributes only in plasma and if a tube is underfilled, the reduced
plasma volume will contain more citrate anticoagulant, leading to
increased calcium chelation (see citrate tubes A–E). Furthermore, there
is an increased proportional volume of anticoagulant due to the lower
plasma volume, which results in a potential dilution effect.2
The net effect is prolongation of clot-based assays (e.g. APTT, PT, protein C/protein S clot-based activity assays, and clot-based factor activity assays). The potential for erroneous results is often more pronounced in specimen tubes containing 3.8 percent sodium citrate or in smaller-volume containers such as half-draw or pediatric collection tubes.2,3
The net effect is prolongation of clot-based assays (e.g. APTT, PT, protein C/protein S clot-based activity assays, and clot-based factor activity assays). The potential for erroneous results is often more pronounced in specimen tubes containing 3.8 percent sodium citrate or in smaller-volume containers such as half-draw or pediatric collection tubes.2,3
Hematocrit greater than 55
percent. Laboratories must also monitor for specimens with a hematocrit
greater than 55 percent. In this situation, the plasma volume is
reduced, resulting in a reduced plasma volume similar to that of an
underfilled tube. The CAP hematology and coagulation checklist requires
that laboratories have a written procedure for detection and special
handling of specimens with elevated hematocrits.4 The amount
of anticoagulant may require an adjustment in samples containing a
hematocrit above 55 percent. The most efficient method to determine the
appropriate citrate volume is to include a table in the laboratory
specimen collection procedure indicating the modified volume of citrate
for hematocrits greater than 55 percent. The formula to determine the
correct volume of citrate for a given hematocrit is as follows:5
C = (1.85×10-3)(100−Hct)(V
blood), where C indicates the volume (mL) citrate needed in the tube;
Hct (%), the hematocrit of the patient; and V, the volume (mL) of whole
blood. Note: In a 3.5 mL specimen tube, the volume of blood drawn is
3.15 mL (i.e. V=3.15 mL in this equation).
In theory, should an underfilled tube or
specimen with a hematocrit greater than 55 percent actually show normal
screening PT or APTT coagulation results, one can conclude the patient
has normal hemostatic results. However, this may be a deviation from
standard operating procedure, so the medical director should make the
final decision. Only the laboratory medical director or a qualified
laboratory physician should approve deviations from an SOP. Before a
laboratory physician approves the results from an improperly filled
specimen collection tube, an investigation into the patient’s clinical
situation and indication for testing should be reviewed. There are
situations in which re-collection may pose increased risk to a patient
(a neonate, for example); in such cases performing the basic
screening coagulation assays is indicated, and if the results are within
normal limits, the laboratory physician may choose to release those
results. Coagulation assays that do not rely on clot formation are often
acceptable for testing, yet approval for testing should also be
determined by the pathologist.
Other
calcium-dependent, clot-based special coagulation assays such as the
protein C (PC) and protein S (PS) activity assays, which use PT or APTT
methodology, should not be performed on an over-citrated specimen. In
the PC and PS assays, falsely prolonged clotting times may result in
overestimation of PC or PS activity. Thus, an over-citrated specimen
secondary to an underfilled tube or hematocrit greater than 55 percent
may be misinterpreted as having normal PC or PS activity. In the
clot-based PC and PS activity assays, a short time to the clotting
endpoint (fibrin formation) correlates to abnormally low PS and/or PS
activity. Therefore, low PC and/or PS activity results from specimens
that are underfilled or have hematocrit greater than 55 percent may
represent a true, “qualitatively” low value, yet the accuracy (i.e.
exact value) of the activity would be in question; if testing is
performed, the pathologists must review these results and determine how
(or if) the result should be reported. Clot-based factor activity assays
are also subject to these preanalytic errors. Over-citrated specimens
may cause falsely prolonged clotting times in the factor activity
assays, resulting in erroneously low factor activity levels.
Overfilled
sodium citrate tube. Overfilled specimen collection tubes can also
occur. A common cause for overfilled specimen tubes is when whole blood
is first drawn into a syringe and then forcibly injected into a specimen
tube. Overfilled citrate tubes can also occur when the stopper (cap) is
removed and additional blood is added. This may be an indication that a
specimen from one collection tube was poured (added) into a second
collection tube, and this practice is unacceptable.2 Overfilled tubes
may result in poor mixing of the anticoagulant and lead to inaccurate
results. Regardless of the cause of an overfilled tube, it violates the
9:1 ratio, and testing should be approved only by the pathologist.
In
conclusion, improperly filled specimen tubes should call into question
the collection process. The guidelines provided by CLSI H21-A5 clearly
state, “Specimens that are clotted, collected in the wrong anticoagulant
type (e.g., EDTA, sodium heparin), have other than a 9:1 blood to
anticoagulation ratio, or are collected or stored in a container with an
activating surface, are not suitable for testing and should be rejected
[italics added].”1 One must be cautious when accepting an improperly
collected specimen. Approving the specimen for testing often undermines
the strict specimen collection requirements designed for accurate
coagulation test results and patient safety. Making exceptions to these
rules may falsely reassure clinical medical providers that improperly
filled citrate specimen tubes are acceptable. Exceptions to the
re-collection for underfilled tubes or patients with hematocrit greater
than 55 percent should be considered only when screening PT and/or when
APTT test results are normal or when specimen re-collection is not
possible.
http://captodayonline.com/qa-column-0816/
http://captodayonline.com/qa-column-0816/
- Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Collection, Transport, and Processing of Blood Specimens for Testing Plasma-Based Coagulation Assays and Molecular Hemostasis Assays; Approved Guideline—Fifth Edition (H21-A5). Jan. 23, 2008.
- Kitchen S, Olson JD, Preston FE, eds. Quality in Laboratory Hemostasis and Thrombosis. 2nd ed. Chichester, West Sussex, U.K.: Wiley-Blackwell; 2013:45–56.
- Bennett ST, Lehman CM, Rodgers GM, eds. Laboratory Hemostasis: A Practical Guide for Pathologists. 2nd ed. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International; 2015: 173–175.
- College of American Pathologists. Hematology and coagulation checklist. July 28, 2015.
- Kottke-Marchant K. An Algorithmic Approach to Hemostasis Testing. 2nd ed. Northfield, Ill.: CAP Press; 2016:46–47.