Annals of Clinical Biochemistry > Volume 46, Number 6 > Pp. 484-487

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: acb.2009.009027v1 46/6/484    most recent Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Google Scholar Articles by Sodi, R Articles by Fraser, W D PubMed PubMed Citation Social Bookmarking                      What's this?

Original Articles

Acidification and urine calcium: is it a preanalytical necessity?

R Sodi¹, L B Bailey¹, J Glaysher², L Allars¹, N B Roberts¹, E M Marks¹ and W D Fraser¹

¹ Department of Clinical Biochemistry & Metabolic Medicine, Royal Liverpool & Broadgreen University Hospital, Prescot Street, Liverpool L7 8XP; ² Department of Clinical Biochemistry, Booth Hall Children's Hospital, Charlestown Road, Manchester M9 7AA, UK

Corresponding author: R Sodi. Email: ravsodi{at}yahoo.com

Background: It has been suggested that for the accurate measurement of calcium in urine, samples must be collected into bottles containing acid. Acidification poses risks to both patients and laboratory staff. Here we reappraise whether acidification is a preanalytical necessity.

Methods: Twenty-four-hour urine samples were collected from 133 patients into bottles without acid or preservatives. In a subset of 29 patients, 10 mL aliquots were prepared to test the effect on urine calcium of 0.1, 1.0 and 5.0 mol/L hydrochloric acid (HCl). Calcium was then measured immediately after acidification, after 12 h and seven days storage at 4°C. In a separate study, urine calcium concentrations in paired control (non-acidified) and acidified (with 5 mol/L HCl) samples were compared in 133 patients. When available, we recorded the time from start of urine collection to time of analysis. Calcium was measured using the cresolphthalein complexone colorimetric endpoint assay on the Roche Modular system.

Results: There was no significant difference in the calcium concentration in the 29 cases studied between the varying acid concentrations tested compared with non-acidified urine (P = 0.987). Overall, in 133 patients there was no difference between control and acidified samples (P = 0.888). We found no correlation between basal urine pH and urine calcium at all time points studied.

Conclusions: Our results suggest that the acidification of urine samples is not a preanalytical necessity for the measurement of urine calcium.

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?