Home Clinical impact of citrate-containing tubes on the detection of glucose abnormalities by the oral glucose tolerance test
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Clinical impact of citrate-containing tubes on the detection of glucose abnormalities by the oral glucose tolerance test

  • Graziella Bonetti EMAIL logo , Davide Giavarina and Mariarosa Carta
Published/Copyright: March 15, 2019

Abstract

Background

Plasma glucose levels provide the cornerstone of diabetes evaluation, and so it is crucial that clinical laboratories provide accurate and reliable plasma glucose results. To prevent in vitro glycolysis, citrate is used. Here, we present the first study on the 75-g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) using the currently available new citrate-containing tubes in liquid and granular forms and the previous sodium fluoride (NaF) for the diagnosis of carbohydrate metabolism disorders and gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) according to the American Diabetes Association (ADA) guidelines.

Methods

The 75-g OGTT was performed in 147 volunteers, 83 of whom were pregnant women. Blood was collected in NaF/K3 ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) and NaF/Na2EDTA/citrate in liquid form in tubes in Brescia and in NaF/K2Ox and NaF/Na2EDTA/citrate in granular form in Vicenza. Glucose was measured within 3–4 h from the OGTT. The mean biases were calculated and compared with the desirable bias (<± 2.1%).

Results

OGTT glucose concentrations were higher in citrate tubes when compared to NaF-containing tubes. When citrate tubes were used, GDM increased to 12.5 and 11.7% in Brescia and Vicenza, respectively. Impaired fasting glucose (IFG), impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) and diabetes mellitus (DM) increased to 36.7, 6.7 and 3.4%, respectively, in Brescia. In Vicenza, an increase of 47 and 1.9% in IFG and IGT, respectively, was found.

Conclusions

OGTT glucose measurement in citrate-containing tubes was shown to be more effective than those containing only NaF in diagnosing carbohydrate disorders. This new glycolysis inhibitor seems to be a necessary preanalytical tool for accurate and reliable plasma glucose results.

  1. Author contributions: All the authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this submitted manuscript and approved submission.

  2. Research funding: None declared.

  3. Employment or leadership: None declared.

  4. Honorarium: None declared.

  5. Competing interests: The funding organization(s) played no role in the study design; in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; or in the decision to submit the report for publication.

References

1. Sacks DB, Arnold M, Bakris GL, Bruns DE, Horvath AR, Kirkman MS, et al. Guidelines and recommendations for laboratory analysis in the diagnosis and management of diabetes mellitus. Clin Chem 2011;57:e1–47.10.1373/clinchem.2010.161596Search in Google Scholar PubMed

2. The HAPO Study Cooperative Research Group. Hyperglycemia and adverse pregnancy outcomes. N Engl J Med 2008;358:1991–2002.10.1056/NEJMoa0707943Search in Google Scholar PubMed

3. Chan A, Swaminathan R, Cockram C. Effectiveness of sodium fluoride as a preservative of glucose in blood. Clin Chem 1989;35:315–7.10.1093/clinchem/35.2.315Search in Google Scholar

4. Bonetti G, Carta M, Lapolla A, Miccoli R, Testa R, Mosca A, et al. Correct determination of glycemia in the diagnosis and management of diabetes: recommendations for the optimization of the pre-analytical phase. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis 2019;29:1–3.10.1016/j.numecd.2018.09.013Search in Google Scholar PubMed

5. Bonetti G, Carta M, Montagnana M, Lo Cascio C, Bonfigli AR, Mosca A, et al. Effectiveness of citrate buffer-fluoride mixture in Terumo tubes as an inhibitor of in vitro glycolysis. Biochemia Medica 2016;26:68–76.10.11613/BM.2016.006Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

6. Carta M, Montagnana M, Lo Cascio C, Bonetti G, Italian joint SIBioC-SIPMeL study group on diabetes mellitus. Glucose sampling: importance of citrate. Ann Clin Biochem 2016;53:715–6.10.1177/0004563216645621Search in Google Scholar PubMed

7. Bonetti G, Cancelli V, Coccoli G, Piccinelli G, Brugnoni D, Caimi L, et al. Which sample tube should be used for routine glucose determination? Prim Care Diabetes 2016;10:227–32.10.1016/j.pcd.2015.11.003Search in Google Scholar PubMed

8. Bonetti G, Carta M. The new Greiner FC-Mix tubes equal the old Terumo ones and are useful as glucose stabilizer after prolonged storage of samples. Biochem Med (Zagreb) 2017;27:030901.10.11613/BM.2017.030901Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

9. van der Hagen EA, Fokkert MJ, Kleefman AM, Thelen MH, van den Berg SA, Slingerland RJ. Technical and clinical validation of the Greiner FC-Mix glycaemia tube. Clin Chem Lab Med 2017;55:1530–6.10.1515/cclm-2016-0944Search in Google Scholar PubMed

10. Daly N, Flynn I, Carroll C, Farren M, Farren M, McKeating A, et al. Impact of implementing preanalytical laboratory standards on the diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus: a prospective observational study. Clin Chem 2016;62:387–91.10.1373/clinchem.2015.247478Search in Google Scholar PubMed

11. Giavarina D, Lippi G. A survey on sample matrix and preanalytical management in clinical laboratories. Biochim Clin 2017;41:142–7.Search in Google Scholar

12. American Diabetes Association. Standards of medical care. Classification and diagnosis of diabetes. Diabetes Care 2018;41(Suppl 1):S13–28.Search in Google Scholar

13. International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups Consensus Panel. International association of diabetes and pregnancy study groups recommendations on the diagnosis and classification of hyperglycemia in pregnancy. Diabetes Care 2010;33:676–82.10.2337/dc09-1848Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

14. Aarsand AK, Diaz-Garzon J, Fernandez-Calle P, Guerra E, Locatelli M, Bartlett WA, et al. The EuBIVAS: within- and between-subject biological variation data for electrolytes, lipids, urea, uric acid, total protein, total bilirubin, direct bilirubin and glucose. Clin Chem 2018;64:1380–93.10.1373/clinchem.2018.288415Search in Google Scholar PubMed

15. Festa R, Carta M, Ceriello A, Testa R. Time is glucose, can’t miss gestational diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Technol Ther 2012;14:444–6.10.1089/dia.2011.0225Search in Google Scholar PubMed

16. Daly N, Flynn I, Carroll C, Stapleton M, O’Kelly R, Turner MJ. Comparison of citrate-fluoride-EDTA with fluoride-EDTA additives to stabilize plasma glucose measurements in women being screened during pregnancy with an oral glucose tolerance test: a prospective observational study. Clin Chem 2016;62:886–7.10.1373/clinchem.2016.254466Search in Google Scholar PubMed

17. Carey RJ, Churcher M, Hughes R, Florkowski CM, Frampton CM, Heenan HF, et al. Will the use of lyophilized citrate tubes lead to the over-diagnosis of diabetes in pregnancy? J Appl Lab Med 2017;1:592–4.10.1373/jalm.2016.022103Search in Google Scholar PubMed

18. Pasqualetti S, Szoke D, Valente M, Panteghini M. Glycolysis inhibition and reliable plasma glucose results: is the clinical impact carefully considered? Clin Chem Lab Med 1995;53:S104.Search in Google Scholar

19. Ridefelt P, Akerfelt T, Helmersson-Karlqvist J. Increased plasma glucose levels after change of recommendation from NaF to citrate blood collection tubes. Clin Biochem 2014;47:625–8.10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2014.02.022Search in Google Scholar PubMed

20. Norman M, Jones L. The shift from fluoride/oxalate to acid citrate/fluoride blood collection tubes for glucose testing – the impact upon patients results. Clin Biochem 2014;47: 683–5.10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2014.01.011Search in Google Scholar PubMed

21. Yoa RG, Rapin JR, Wiernsperger NF, Martinand A, Belleville I. Demonstration of defective glucose uptake and storage in erythrocytes from non-insulin dependent diabetic patients and effect of metformin. Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol 1993;20:563–7.10.1111/j.1440-1681.1993.tb01742.xSearch in Google Scholar PubMed

22. Saracevic A, Dukic L, Juricic G, Milevoj Kopcinovic L, Mirosevic G, Simundic AM. Various glycolysis inhibitor-containing tubes for glucose measurement cannot be used interchangeably due to clinically unacceptable biases between them. Clin Chem Lab Med 2018;56:236–41.10.1515/cclm-2017-0279Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Received: 2018-11-13
Accepted: 2019-02-15
Published Online: 2019-03-15
Published in Print: 2019-11-26

©2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 16.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/dx-2018-0100/html
Scroll to top button