4.2 Article

Gestational age-specific reference intervals for 15 biochemical measurands during normal pregnancy in China

Journal

ANNALS OF CLINICAL BIOCHEMISTRY
Volume 55, Issue 4, Pages 446-452

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/0004563217738801

Keywords

Pregnancy; reference intervals; kidney function tests; liver function tests

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aims: Physiological changes that occur during pregnancy can influence biochemical parameters. Therefore, using reference intervals based on specimens from non-pregnant women to interpret laboratory results during pregnancy may be inappropriate. This study aimed to establish the essential reference intervals for a range of analytes during pregnancy. Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed in 13,656 healthy pregnant and 2634 non-pregnant women. Fifteen biochemical measurands relating to renal and hepatic function were analysed using an Olympus AU5400 analyzer (Olympus, Tokyo, Japan). All the laboratory results were checked for outliers using Dixon's test. Reference intervals were established using a non-parametric method. Results: Alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, albumin, cholinesterase, creatinine, direct bilirubin, gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase, total bilirubin, total bile acid and total protein showed a decrease during the whole gestational period, while alkaline phosphatase and uric acid increased. Urea nitrogen, beta(2)-microglobulin and cystatin-C fell significantly during the first trimester and then remained relatively stable until third trimester. Reference intervals of all the measurands during normal pregnancy have been established. Conclusions: The reference intervals established here can be adopted in other clinical laboratories after appropriate validation. We verified the importance, for some measurands, of partitioning by gestational age when establishing reference intervals during pregnancy.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available