We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Albumin-corrected or ionized calcium in renal failure? What to measure?
Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2005 October
BACKGROUND: Secondary hyperparathyroidsm is frequently observed in patients with chronic renal failure, and clinical treatment guidelines have been published. Despite this, a large proportion of patients do not reach the target levels for calcium, phosphorus, calcium x phosphorus product, or intact parathyroid hormone. The use of albumin-corrected calcium is recommended as calcium measurement, but it is the concentration of ionized calcium that is biologically active. We hypothesized that in clinical practice, the use of ionized calcium rather than albumin-corrected calcium would influence the calcium classification of the individual patient.
METHODS: Blood samples from 34 patients in chronic haemodialysis were analysed for evaluation of mineral metabolism according to K/DOQI guidelines. Blood for analysis of total and ionized calcium was drawn simultaneously. As ionized calcium is pH dependent, samples were analysed at the actual pH of the individual patient.
RESULTS: For both methods, a similar number of patients were characterized as normocalcaemic. The use of albumin-corrected calcium caused one patient (3%) to be classified as hypocalcaemic, and 10 patients (26%) as hypercalcaemic whereas with ionized calcium, five (15%) and three patients (9%) were classified as hypo- and hypercalcaemic, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: According to present guidelines, the difference in calcium classification of patients might have clinical implications for the prescription of vitamin D, and on the choice of phosphate binders.
METHODS: Blood samples from 34 patients in chronic haemodialysis were analysed for evaluation of mineral metabolism according to K/DOQI guidelines. Blood for analysis of total and ionized calcium was drawn simultaneously. As ionized calcium is pH dependent, samples were analysed at the actual pH of the individual patient.
RESULTS: For both methods, a similar number of patients were characterized as normocalcaemic. The use of albumin-corrected calcium caused one patient (3%) to be classified as hypocalcaemic, and 10 patients (26%) as hypercalcaemic whereas with ionized calcium, five (15%) and three patients (9%) were classified as hypo- and hypercalcaemic, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: According to present guidelines, the difference in calcium classification of patients might have clinical implications for the prescription of vitamin D, and on the choice of phosphate binders.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app