Which of the following test results are affected when a phlebotomy technician uses povidone iodine to cleanse a site for dermal puncture?

Red is such a pretty color... unless it tinges the serum or plasma of the specimen you collected. Then it's ugly. It's ugly because it usually means the time you spent drawing the specimen was wasted and the draw will have to be repeated. But it's more than a time killer. Having to recollect a hemolyzed specimen that is incapable of rendering accurate and useful results to the physician delays treatment, diagnosis, and/or much-needed medications. In critical situations, time isn't just money, it can be life itself. Hemolysis has been reported to be the number one cause of rejected chemistry specimens. In fact, six times more specimens are rejected because of hemolysis than the second-most common reason, insufficient sample volume. But before we master the art of preventing hemolysis, we have to understand how it occurs. "Hemo" means blood, of course; "lysis" means to rupture or the destruction of cells. So hemolysis is literally the destruction of blood cells, specifically red blood cells. When red cells rupture, they spill their contents, mostly hemoglobin, into their surroundings. Hemoglobin is a respiratory pigment that has an insatiable passion for oxygen and gloms onto every molecule it can hold while passing through the lungs, then dumps it off into the tissue where it's needed for cellular functions. Hemoglobin is also what makes blood red. So naturally, when red cells burst, it tinges the liquid portion of the blood. If red cells burst during specimen collection, the blood being tested is not the same as the blood circulating in the patient. It's as different as night and day. Because red blood cells contain 23 times as much potassium as the liquid portion of the blood, when red cells rupture during collection, the specimen being submitted for testing is spiked with potassium. In fact, it's spiked with so much potassium that, if tested and reported, the results can send the physician into a sheer panic, forcing him or her to react with orders that can be ultimately unfavorable to the patient. Or, if the patient's circulating potassium is actually too low, hemolysis can spike the specimen into a normal range and lead to inaction when action is necessary. But it's not just potassium that hemolysis affects. These other tests are affected when hemolyzed specimens are submitted for testing: LDH, AST, ALT, phosphorous, magnesium, ammonia, RBC, hemoglobin and hematocrit. Not only these analytes, but virtually everything that could be tested. That's because hemoglobin is a liquid protein which dilutes the serum or plasma being tested. The greater the hemolysis, the greater the dilution. Suffice it to say hemolysis is just all-around nasty. So how do those who collect specimens prevent the lab from reporting inaccurate results? Check your practices to minimize these seven top causes:

Avoid line draws---IV devices are notorious for hemolyzing red cells. Unless you're using a device like PIVO, perform a venipuncture instead;
Avoid vigorous mixing---think of red cells as fragile crystal orbs that fracture with the least amount of disturbance;
Avoid excessive pulling pressure when using syringes---red cells don't tolerate the excessive turbulence from forcefully withdrawing the plunger of the syringe;
Don't rim clots---rimming clots to remove fibrin invariably ruptures red cells at the same time;
Position the needle properly---a needle partially occluded by the vein wall is a needle that hemolyzes red cells;
Prewarm skin puncture sites---this reduces the need to excessively squeeze the tissue, which hemolyzes red cells;
Fill tubes fully---an excessive concentration of anticoagulant when tubes are underfilled is hard on fragile red cell membranes.

Using these and other techniques can minimize your potential to hemolyze specimens. Since accurate results begin with the collector, those who draw blood specimens are in the best position to make sure patients are treated according to results that are not delayed or altered because of hemolysis.

The real art of hemolysis is in avoiding it in the first place.

Note: for an attractively designed PDF of this article for posting in your facility, visit our Free Stuff page.

What's Your Problem?

AMT has designated Phlebotomists Recognition Week (from Feb. 14-18)

A phlebotomy technician uses alcohol to cleanse a venipuncture site. Before performing thevenipuncture, the technician should allow the site to dry for which of the following reasons?

1. Lippi G, Blanckaert N, Bonini P, Green S, Kitchen S, Palicka V, et al. Haemolysis: an overview of the leading cause of unsuitable specimens in clinical laboratories. Clin Chem Lab Med 2008;46(6):764-772. 10.1515/CCLM.2008.170 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

2. Jeffery J, Sharma A, Ayling RM. Detection of haemolysis and reporting of potassium results in samples from neonates. Ann Clin Biochem 2009. May;46(Pt 3):222-225. 10.1258/acb.2009.008241 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

3. Lippi G, Salvagno GL, Montagnana M, Brocco G, Guidi GC. Influence of hemolysis on routine clinical chemistry testing. Clin Chem Lab Med 2006;44(3):311-316. 10.1515/CCLM.2006.054 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

4. Plebani M. Errors in clinical laboratories or errors in laboratory medicine? Clin Chem Lab Med 2006;44(6):750-759. 10.1515/CCLM.2006.123 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

5. Goyal T, Schmotzer CL. Validation of hemolysis index thresholds optimizes detection of clinically significant hemolysis. Am J Clin Pathol 2015. Apr;143(4):579-583. 10.1309/AJCPDUDE1HRA0YMR [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

6. Lippi G, Guidi GC. Risk management in the preanalytical phase of laboratory testing. Clin Chem Lab Med 2007;45(6):720-727. 10.1515/CCLM.2007.167 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

7. Jones BA, Calam RR, Howanitz PJ. Chemistry specimen acceptability: a College of American Pathologists Q-Probes study of 453 laboratories. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1997. Jan;121(1):19-26. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

8. Bonini P, Plebani M, Ceriotti F, Rubboli F. Errors in laboratory medicine. Clin Chem 2002. May;48(5):691-698. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

9. Carraro P, Plebani M. Errors in a stat laboratory: types and frequencies 10 years later. Clin Chem 2007. Jul;53(7):1338-1342. 10.1373/clinchem.2007.088344 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

10. Hashimoto C. Autoimmune hemolytic anemia. Clin Rev Allergy Immunol 1998;16(3):285-295. 10.1007/BF02737638 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

11. Lippi G, Plebani M, Di Somma S, Cervellin G. Hemolyzed specimens: a major challenge for emergency departments and clinical laboratories. Crit Rev Clin Lab Sci 2011. May-Jun;48(3):143-153. 10.3109/10408363.2011.600228 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

12. Guder WG. Haemolysis as an influence and interference factor in clinical chemistry. J Clin Chem Clin Biochem 1986. Feb;24(2):125-126. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

13. Bessler M, Schaefer A, Keller P. Paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria: insights from recent advances in molecular biology. Transfus Med Rev 2001. Oct;15(4):255-267. 10.1053/tm.2001.26958 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

14. Baek S-W, Lee M-W, Ryu H-W, Lee K-S, Song I-C, Lee H-J, et al. Clinical features and outcomes of autoimmune hemolytic anemia: a retrospective analysis of 32 cases. Korean J Hematol 2011. Jun;46(2):111-117. 10.5045/kjh.2011.46.2.111 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

15. Hassan KS, Al-Riyami AZ, Al-Huneini M, Al-Farsi K, Al-Khabori M. Methemoglobinemia in an elderly patient with glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency: a case report. Oman Med J 2014. Mar;29(2):135-137. 10.5001/omj.2014.33 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

16. Carraro P, Servidio G, Plebani M. Hemolyzed specimens: a reason for rejection or a clinical challenge? Clin Chem 2000. Feb;46(2):306-307. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

17. Rother RP, Bell L, Hillmen P, Gladwin MT. The clinical sequelae of intravascular hemolysis and extracellular plasma hemoglobin: a novel mechanism of human disease. JAMA 2005. Apr;293(13):1653-1662. 10.1001/jama.293.13.1653 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

18. Ideguchi H, Ishikawa A, Futata Y, Yamada Y, Ono Y, Sugisaki S, et al. A comprehensive scheme for the systematic investigation of hemolytic anemia. Ann Clin Lab Sci 1994. Sep-Oct;24(5):412-421. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

19. Tolan NV, Kaleta EJ, Fang JL, Colby CE, Carey WA, Karon BS, et al. Neonatal intensive care unit quality initiative: identifying preanalytical variables contributing to specimen hemolysis and measuring the impact of evidence-based practice interventions. Am J Clin Pathol 2016. Jul;146(1):113-118. 10.1093/ajcp/aqw086 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

20. Bush V, Mangan L. The hemolyzed specimen: causes, effects, and reduction. BD Vacutainer Syst Preanalytical Solut 2003;2003:1-8. [Google Scholar]

21. Streichert T, Otto B, Schnabel C, Nordholt G, Haddad M, Maric M, et al. Determination of hemolysis thresholds by the use of data loggers in pneumatic tube systems. Clin Chem 2011. Oct;57(10):1390-1397. 10.1373/clinchem.2011.167932 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

22. Simundic A-M, Topic E, Nikolac N, Lippi G. Hemolysis detection and management of hemolyzed specimens. Biochem Med (Zagreb) 2010;20(2):154-159 . 10.11613/BM.2010.018 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

23. Lippi G, Avanzini P, Pavesi F, Bardi M, Ippolito L, Aloe R, et al. Studies on in vitro hemolysis and utility of corrective formulas for reporting results on hemolyzed specimens. Biochem Med (Zagreb) 2011;21(3):297-305. 10.11613/BM.2011.040 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

24. Grafmeyer D, Bondon M, Manchon M, Levillain P. The influence of bilirubin, haemolysis and turbidity on 20 analytical tests performed on automatic analysers. Results of an interlaboratory study. Eur J Clin Chem Clin Biochem 1995. Jan;33(1):31-52. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

25. Jay DW, Provasek D. Characterization and mathematical correction of hemolysis interference in selected Hitachi 717 assays. Clin Chem 1993. Sep;39(9):1804-1810. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

26. Sonntag O. Haemolysis as an interference factor in clinical chemistry. J Clin Chem Clin Biochem 1986. Feb;24(2):127-139. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

27. Koseoglu M, Hur A, Atay A, Cuhadar S. Effects of hemolysis interferences on routine biochemistry parameters. Biochem Med (Zagreb) 2011;21(1):79-85. 10.11613/BM.2011.015 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

28. Ismail A, Shingler W, Seneviratne J, Burrows G. In vitro and in vivo haemolysis and potassium measurement. BMJ 2005. Apr;330(7497):949. 10.1136/bmj.330.7497.949 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

29. Mather A, Mackie NR. Effects of hemolysis on serum electrolyte values. Clin Chem 1960. Jun;6(3):223-227. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

30. Liamis G, Liberopoulos E, Barkas F, Elisaf M. Spurious electrolyte disorders: a diagnostic challenge for clinicians. Am J Nephrol 2013;38(1):50-57. 10.1159/000351804 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

31. Abd Elrouf MB, Amanullah M, Zaman GS. Interference of hemolysis in the estimation of plasma aspartate aminotransferase, potassium and phosphate. Journal of Investigational Biochemistry. 2014;3(1):12-16 . 10.5455/jib.20130611094024 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

32. Blank DW, Kroll MH, Ruddel ME, Elin RJ. Hemoglobin interference from in vivo hemolysis. Clin Chem 1985. Sep;31(9):1566-1569. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

33. Kara H, Bayir A, Ak A, Degirmenci S, Akinci M, Agacayak A, et al. Hemolysis associated with pneumatic tube system transport for blood samples. Pak J Med Sci 2014. Jan;30(1):50-58. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

34. Withold W. Monitoring of bone turnover biological, preanalytical and technical criteria in the assessment of biochemical markers. Eur J Clin Chem Clin Biochem 1996. Oct;34(10):785-799. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

35. Kristiansen M, Graversen JH, Jacobsen C, Sonne O, Hoffman H-J, Law SK, et al. Identification of the haemoglobin scavenger receptor. Nature 2001. Jan;409(6817):198-201. 10.1038/35051594 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

36. Körmöczi GF, Säemann MD, Buchta C, Peck-Radosavljevic M, Mayr WR, Schwartz DW, et al. Influence of clinical factors on the haemolysis marker haptoglobin. Eur J Clin Invest 2006. Mar;36(3):202-209. 10.1111/j.1365-2362.2006.01617.x [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

37. Lee GR. Hemolytic disorders: general considerations. In: Lee GR, Foerster J, Paraskevar F, Greer JP, Rodgers GM, editors. Wintrobe’s clinical hematology. 10th ed. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins; 1999. p. 1109-1131. [Google Scholar]

38. Das SS, Nityanand S, Chaudhary R. Clinical and serological characterization of autoimmune hemolytic anemia in a tertiary care hospital in North India. Ann Hematol 2009. Aug;88(8):727-732. 10.1007/s00277-008-0674-6 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

39. Barcellini W, Fattizzo B. Clinical applications of hemolytic markers in the differential diagnosis and management of hemolytic anemia. Dis Markers 2015;2015:635670. 10.1155/2015/635670 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

40. Kato GJ, McGowan V, Machado RF, Little JA, Taylor J, VI, Morris CR, et al. Lactate dehydrogenase as a biomarker of hemolysis-associated nitric oxide resistance, priapism, leg ulceration, pulmonary hypertension, and death in patients with sickle cell disease. Blood 2006. Mar;107(6):2279-2285. 10.1182/blood-2005-06-2373 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

41. Tabbara IA. Hemolytic anemias. Diagnosis and management. Med Clin North Am 1992. May;76(3):649-668. 10.1016/S0025-7125(16)30345-5 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

42. Glick MR, Ryder KW, Glick SJ, Woods JR. Unreliable visual estimation of the incidence and amount of turbidity, hemolysis, and icterus in serum from hospitalized patients. Clin Chem 1989. May;35(5):837-839. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

43. Hawkins R. Discrepancy between visual and spectrophotometric assessment of sample haemolysis. Ann Clin Biochem 2002. Sep;39(Pt 5):521-522. 10.1258/000456302320314575 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

44. Simundic A-M, Nikolac N, Ivankovic V, Ferenec-Ruzic D, Magdic B, Kvaternik M, et al. Comparison of visual vs. automated detection of lipemic, icteric and hemolyzed specimens: can we rely on a human eye? Clin Chem Lab Med 2009;47(11):1361-1365. 10.1515/CCLM.2009.306 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

45. Howanitz PJ, Lehman CM, Jones BA, Meier FA, Horowitz GL. Practices for identifying and rejecting hemolyzed specimens are highly variable in clinical laboratories. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2015. Aug;139(8):1014-1019. 10.5858/arpa.2014-0161-CP [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

46. Plebani M, Lippi G, Cervellin G, Favaloro EJ. In vitro and in vivo hemolysis: an unresolved dispute in laboratory medicine. Walter De Gruyter; 2012. [Google Scholar]

47. Lippi G. Systematic assessment of the hemolysis index: pros and cons. Adv Clin Chem 2015;71:157-170. 10.1016/bs.acc.2015.05.002 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

48. Heireman L, Van Geel P, Musger L, Heylen E, Uyttenbroeck W, Mahieu B. Causes, consequences and management of sample hemolysis in the clinical laboratory. Clin Biochem 2017. Dec;50(18):1317-1322. 10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2017.09.013 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

49. Cadamuro J, Simundic A-M, Ajzner E, Sandberg S. A pragmatic approach to sample acceptance and rejection. Clin Biochem 2017. Jul;50(10-11):579-581. 10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2017.02.001 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

50. Cadamuro J, Mrazek C, Haschke-Becher E, Sandberg S. To report or not to report: a proposal on how to deal with altered test results in hemolytic samples. Clin Chem Lab Med 2017. Jul;55(8):1109-1111. 10.1515/cclm-2016-1064 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

51. Howanitz PJ. Errors in laboratory medicine: practical lessons to improve patient safety. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2005. Oct;129(10):1252-1261. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

52. Lippi G. Reply to the letter by Carraro: appropriate actions in the detection of haemolytic specimens. Clin Chem Lab Med 2008;46(3):426 . 10.1515/CCLM.2008.088 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

53. Challand GS, Li P. The assessment of interpretation of test results in laboratory medicine. Biochem Med (Zagreb) 2009;19(2):146-153 . 10.11613/BM.2009.014 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

54. Vermeer HJ, Steen G, Naus AJ, Goevaerts B, Agricola PT, Schoenmakers CH. Correction of patient results for Beckman Coulter LX-20 assays affected by interference due to hemoglobin, bilirubin or lipids: a practical approach. Clin Chem Lab Med 2007;45(1):114-119. 10.1515/CCLM.2007.004 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

55. Lippi G, Cervellin G, Plebani M. Reporting altered test results in hemolyzed samples: is the cure worse than the disease? Clin Chem Lab Med 2017. Jul;55(8):1112-1114. 10.1515/cclm-2017-0011 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]