Effect of pH on the Quantification of Body Fluid Analytes for Clinical Diagnostic Testing
Authors: Nandakumar Vijayalakshmi , Dolan Christopher , Baumann Nikola A , Block Darci R 
Published: September 2019

Abstract

Background
Body fluid samples (BFs) with low pH have demonstrated underrecovery of enzyme activity. The aims of this study were (1) measure the frequency of abnormal pH in BFs received for clinical chemistry testing, (2) calculate recovery of analytes in BFs undergoing pH titration, and (3) investigate the mechanism of pH interference.

Methods
Residual BFs submitted for physician-ordered testing to the Central Clinical Laboratory (Mayo Clinic) were utilized for this study. BFs were centrifuged 10 minutes (3,200 rpm) prior to pH measurement (pH meter, Accumet X15; Fisher Scientific) and analysis. A Roche Cobas c501 (Roche Diagnostics) analyzer was used to measure amylase, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), blood urea nitrogen (BUN), creatinine, glucose, albumin, total protein, bilirubin (all Roche Diagnostics reagents), and lipase (Sekisui Diagnostics). pH was measured in 122 BFs received between 10/23/2018 and 10/26/2018 within 24 hours of receipt. pH titration was performed using pooled BFs of similar source/type. Each pool was titrated over a range of pH (≤2 to ≥10) in 1-unit increments by addition of a fixed volume of acid (6M HCL) or base (6M NaOH). Analytes were measured before and after acid/base addition. Average percent recovery was calculated (measured/expected × 100%) from n = 3 to 9 pH measurements. A low pH BF pool was spiked (<5% by volume) with a high-concentration BF to investigate mechanism of enzyme underrecovery. Additionally, low pH BF pool was neutralized by addition of base and % recovery calculated. For all titration/spiking experiments, a control sample having the same volume of diluent (7% bovine serum albumin or saline) was used to account for the effects of dilution.

Results
BFs received (n = 122) had mean (SD) pH = 8.0 (0.6) with 6.6% (n = 8) having pH <7.0 and 2.5% (n = 3) having pH <6.0. All recovery (%) and pH data are expressed as mean (range) values. Amylase recovery (initial pH = 8.4-8.9) was 1.3 (0.9-2.2)% at pH = 1.6 (1.0-2.2) (n = 6), 55.6 (37.4-67.0)% at pH = 4.4 (3.5-5.4) (n = 6), 81.4 (74.0-85.2)% at pH = 6.2 (6.1-6.5) (n = 3), 90.1 (84.4-95.4)% at pH = 7.5 (7.3-7.7) (n = 3), 98.8 (96.2-101.7)% at pH = 10.0 (9.8-10.2) (n = 3), and 14.5 (1.4-38.9)% at pH = 11.9 (11.5-12.1) (n = 3). LDH recovery (initial pH = 8.2-8.5) was 1.4 (0.1-3.7)% at pH = 1.7 (1.0-2.4) (n = 6), 18.3 (0.5-39.7)% at pH = 4.5 (3.5-5.4) (n = 6), 63.6 (54.9-68.4)% at pH = 6.2 (6.1-6.5) (n = 3), 85.9 (80.2-90.7)% at pH = 7.2 (6.8-7.4) (n = 3), 46.1 (36.4-61.0)% at pH = 10.0 (9.8-10.2) (n = 3), and 9.8 (0.0-28.9)% at pH = 11.3 (10.4-12.1) (n = 3). Lipase recovery (initial pH = 8.2-8.9) was 10.4 (<1-18)% at pH = 1.8 (1.0-2.4) (n = 6), 73.9 (62.6-85.5)% at pH = 4.2 (3.4-5.2) (n = 3), 92.4 (90.8-93.5)% at pH = 6.2 (6.0-6.5) (n = 3), 96.3 (95.6-96.8)% at pH = 7.3 (6.8-7.7) (n = 3), and 92.9 (89.3-96.8)% at pH = 9.9 (9.8-10.1) (n = 3) and 80.9 (0.0-78.6)% at pH = 11.3 (10.4-12.1) (n = 3). Creatinine, BUN, albumin, glucose, total protein, and bilirubin recovery were 97.9 (92.2-102.9)%, 100 (96.6-103.1)%, 99.9 (97.6-102.4)%, 100.2 (97.8-103)%, 100.2 (98.7-101.9)%, and 100.1 (92.-105.9)%, respectively, between pH 1.3-11.7 (n = 9). Recovery of amylase, LDH, or lipase was <1% after spiking enzymes into BF pool with pH <3. pH adjustment to normal (pH = 8.6-9.0) also resulted in recovery of <1%.

Conclusion
Enzyme activity in BFs was not affected (90%-110% recovery) when pH = 7.4-8.5 for LDH, pH = 7.3-10.2 for amylase, pH = 6.0-9.9 for lipase, and pH = 1.3-11.7 for all other analytes. An irreversible loss of enzyme activity occurs at low pH. Few clinical BFs have pH <7.0, but laboratories should have awareness.