Clinical Chemistry
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Clinical Chemistry 40: 546-551, 1994;
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Tietz, N. W.
Right arrow Articles by Morrison, S. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Tietz, N. W.
Right arrow Articles by Morrison, S. R.

Clinical Chemistry, Vol 40, 546-551, Copyright © 1994 by American Association for Clinical Chemistry

When is a serum iron really a serum iron? The status of serum iron measurements

NW Tietz, AD Rinker and SR Morrison
Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Kentucky Medical Center, Lexington 40536-0084.

Although serum iron determinations play an important role in the diagnostic process, the accuracy of routine methods is suspect. The poor performance of currently used methods is well documented in the quarterly College of American Pathologists survey reports. Compared with the 1990 method of the International Committee for Standardization in Haematology (ICSH), the 1978 ICSH Reference Method shows a +3.4% bias and the standard method of the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards shows a -17.8% bias for iron results. All routine methods checked--DuPont aca, Abbott TDx, Kodak Ektachem (except one lot), BM/Hitachi 717, and Synermed--show a negative bias over the entire analytical range, a significant negative intercept, and extremely poor correlation with the 1990 ICSH method for iron values < 750 micrograms/L. Individual discrepancies of several hundred percent were observed. Imprecision of the methods is not the reason for these discrepancies. We question whether most routine methods measuring low iron concentrations provide results sufficiently reliable for confirmation of iron deficiency.


The following articles in journals at HighWire Press have cited this article:


Home page
 BloodHome page
L. T. Goodnough, B. Skikne, and C. Brugnara
Erythropoietin, iron, and erythropoiesis
Blood, August 1, 2000; 96(3): 823 - 833.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 BloodHome page
P. Suominen, K. Punnonen, A. Rajamaki, and K. Irjala
Serum Transferrin Receptor and Transferrin Receptor-Ferritin Index Identify Healthy Subjects With Subclinical Iron Deficits
Blood, October 15, 1998; 92(8): 2934 - 2939.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Clin. Chem.Home page
H. Yamanishi, S. Kimura, S. Iyama, Y. Yamaguchi, and T. Yanagihara
Fully automated measurement of total iron-binding capacity in serum
Clin. Chem., December 1, 1997; 43(12): 2413 - 2417.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1994 by the American Association for Clinical Chemistry.