4.7 Article

The Stability of Analytes of Ionized Magnesium Concentration and Its Reference Range in Healthy Volunteers

Journal

BIOMEDICINES
Volume 11, Issue 9, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines11092539

Keywords

reference range; stability; ionized magnesium; whole blood; direct ion selective electrode technique

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study aimed to determine the stability of iMg concentration in refrigerated analytes at different time intervals, and establish iMg reference range in healthy Omani volunteers. The study found that refrigerated samples showed excellent correlation with fresh samples within a refrigeration period of <= 1 hour.
This study aimed to determine the stability of refrigerated analytes of iMg concentration at different time intervals and to establish iMg reference range in a cohort of healthy Omani volunteers (>= 18 years). The concentrations of iMg were measured using the direct ion-selective electrode technique. Pearson's and Lin's concordance correlation coefficients along with the Bland-Altman plot were used to assess the levels of agreement between iMg concentrations of fresh and refrigerated blood samples at different time intervals. The study included 167 volunteers (51% females) with a median age of 21 (range: 20-25) years. The median, 2.5th, and 97.5th percentiles for fresh iMg reference ranges were 0.55, 0.47, and 0.68 mmol/L, respectively. The overall agreement between the fresh and refrigerated iMg concentrations was poor (rho-c = 0.51; p < 0.001). However, according to Altman's definition, iMg concentrations of the refrigerated samples for a period of <= 1 h had an excellent correlation with the fresh iMg concentrations (Lin's rho-c = 0.80), with a small average bias difference of 0.009 (95%CI; -0.025-0.043). A cut-off refrigeration period within <= 1 h at 2-8 degrees C can be considered an alternate time frame for the gold standard measurement (fresh or within 0.5 h).

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available