Cargando…

Comparison of Serum, Plasma, and Liver Zinc Measurements by AAS, ICP-OES, and ICP-MS in Diverse Laboratory Settings

Progress improving zinc nutrition globally is slowed by limited understanding of population zinc status. This challenge is compounded when small differences in measurement can bias the determination of zinc deficiency rates. Our objective was to evaluate zinc analytical accuracy and precision among...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hall, Andrew G., King, Janet C., McDonald, Christine M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9132797/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34453311
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12011-021-02883-z
_version_ 1784713457302503424
author Hall, Andrew G.
King, Janet C.
McDonald, Christine M.
author_facet Hall, Andrew G.
King, Janet C.
McDonald, Christine M.
author_sort Hall, Andrew G.
collection PubMed
description Progress improving zinc nutrition globally is slowed by limited understanding of population zinc status. This challenge is compounded when small differences in measurement can bias the determination of zinc deficiency rates. Our objective was to evaluate zinc analytical accuracy and precision among different instrument types and sample matrices using a standardized method. Participating laboratories analyzed zinc content of plasma, serum, liver samples, and controls, using a standardized method based on current practice. Instrument calibration and drift were evaluated using a zinc standard. Accuracy was evaluated by percent error vs. reference, and precision by coefficient of variation (CV). Seven laboratories in 4 countries running 9 instruments completed the exercise: 4 atomic absorbance spectrometers (AAS), 1 inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometer (ICP-OES), and 4 ICP mass spectrometers (ICP-MS). Calibration differed between individual instruments up to 18.9% (p < 0.001). Geometric mean (95% CI) percent error was 3.5% (2.3%, 5.2%) and CV was 2.1% (1.7%, 2.5%) overall. There were no significant differences in percent error or CV among instrument types (p = 0.91, p = 0.15, respectively). Among sample matrices, serum and plasma zinc measures had the highest CV: 4.8% (3.0%, 7.7%) and 3.9% (2.9%, 5.4%), respectively (p < 0.05). When using standardized materials and methods, similar zinc concentration values, accuracy, and precision were achieved using AAS, ICP-OES, or ICP-MS. However, method development is needed for improvement in serum and plasma zinc measurement precision. Differences in calibration among instruments demonstrate a need for harmonization among laboratories. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12011-021-02883-z.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9132797
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-91327972022-05-27 Comparison of Serum, Plasma, and Liver Zinc Measurements by AAS, ICP-OES, and ICP-MS in Diverse Laboratory Settings Hall, Andrew G. King, Janet C. McDonald, Christine M. Biol Trace Elem Res Article Progress improving zinc nutrition globally is slowed by limited understanding of population zinc status. This challenge is compounded when small differences in measurement can bias the determination of zinc deficiency rates. Our objective was to evaluate zinc analytical accuracy and precision among different instrument types and sample matrices using a standardized method. Participating laboratories analyzed zinc content of plasma, serum, liver samples, and controls, using a standardized method based on current practice. Instrument calibration and drift were evaluated using a zinc standard. Accuracy was evaluated by percent error vs. reference, and precision by coefficient of variation (CV). Seven laboratories in 4 countries running 9 instruments completed the exercise: 4 atomic absorbance spectrometers (AAS), 1 inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometer (ICP-OES), and 4 ICP mass spectrometers (ICP-MS). Calibration differed between individual instruments up to 18.9% (p < 0.001). Geometric mean (95% CI) percent error was 3.5% (2.3%, 5.2%) and CV was 2.1% (1.7%, 2.5%) overall. There were no significant differences in percent error or CV among instrument types (p = 0.91, p = 0.15, respectively). Among sample matrices, serum and plasma zinc measures had the highest CV: 4.8% (3.0%, 7.7%) and 3.9% (2.9%, 5.4%), respectively (p < 0.05). When using standardized materials and methods, similar zinc concentration values, accuracy, and precision were achieved using AAS, ICP-OES, or ICP-MS. However, method development is needed for improvement in serum and plasma zinc measurement precision. Differences in calibration among instruments demonstrate a need for harmonization among laboratories. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12011-021-02883-z. Springer US 2021-08-28 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9132797/ /pubmed/34453311 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12011-021-02883-z Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Article
Hall, Andrew G.
King, Janet C.
McDonald, Christine M.
Comparison of Serum, Plasma, and Liver Zinc Measurements by AAS, ICP-OES, and ICP-MS in Diverse Laboratory Settings
title Comparison of Serum, Plasma, and Liver Zinc Measurements by AAS, ICP-OES, and ICP-MS in Diverse Laboratory Settings
title_full Comparison of Serum, Plasma, and Liver Zinc Measurements by AAS, ICP-OES, and ICP-MS in Diverse Laboratory Settings
title_fullStr Comparison of Serum, Plasma, and Liver Zinc Measurements by AAS, ICP-OES, and ICP-MS in Diverse Laboratory Settings
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Serum, Plasma, and Liver Zinc Measurements by AAS, ICP-OES, and ICP-MS in Diverse Laboratory Settings
title_short Comparison of Serum, Plasma, and Liver Zinc Measurements by AAS, ICP-OES, and ICP-MS in Diverse Laboratory Settings
title_sort comparison of serum, plasma, and liver zinc measurements by aas, icp-oes, and icp-ms in diverse laboratory settings
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9132797/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34453311
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12011-021-02883-z
work_keys_str_mv AT hallandrewg comparisonofserumplasmaandliverzincmeasurementsbyaasicpoesandicpmsindiverselaboratorysettings
AT kingjanetc comparisonofserumplasmaandliverzincmeasurementsbyaasicpoesandicpmsindiverselaboratorysettings
AT mcdonaldchristinem comparisonofserumplasmaandliverzincmeasurementsbyaasicpoesandicpmsindiverselaboratorysettings