Serum or plasma? An old question looking for new answers

Clinical laboratories face ongoing decisions about sample types for testing. Serum has long been the standard for many assays. However, recent studies raise concerns about analyte stability during coagulation. Turn-around time is a key performance indicator in labs. Delays can affect patient outcomes and care quality. Some analytes may change during clot formation. Plasma is proposed as an alternative to avoid these changes. This paper reviews the evidence for serum versus plasma use.

This study aims to compare serum and plasma for clinical testing. The goal is to evaluate the pros and cons of each sample type. Turn-around time is a central factor in this analysis. The impact of coagulation on analyte stability is also considered. Evidence from recent literature is reviewed to guide this comparison. The study includes data on current sample use in various countries. A rationale for switching from serum to plasma is explored. The findings may influence lab protocols and patient care.

The study uses a literature review approach to compare serum and plasma. Current evidence on analyte stability is evaluated. Coagulation-related interferences are examined in detail. Turn-around time data is collected from multiple sources. Sample usage trends are analyzed across different countries. Italy is highlighted as a case study for sample preferences. The rationale for a potential shift to plasma is discussed. The review includes both qualitative and quantitative data.

Serum remains the standard for some assays but has limitations. Coagulation can alter analyte levels and introduce interferences. Plasma may preserve analyte integrity better in certain cases. Turn-around time is faster with plasma in many labs. Evidence from Italy shows widespread use of plasma for specific tests. Other countries also show a trend toward plasma use. Switching from serum to plasma may improve lab efficiency. The decision depends on the specific analyte and assay requirements.

The authors suggest plasma may be preferable in some clinical settings. Faster turn-around time supports plasma use for timely patient care. Coagulation-related changes in serum may affect test accuracy. Evidence from multiple countries supports plasma adoption. The switch from serum to plasma is feasible in many labs. Laboratory directors should consider analyte stability and performance metrics. The choice between serum and plasma should be evidence-based. This review provides a rationale for re-evaluating sample type protocols.