Performance comparison of two automated digital morphology analyzers for leukocyte differential in patients with malignant hematological diseases: Mindray MC‐80 and Sysmex DI‐60

Author:

Ye Xianfei12ORCID,Fang Lijuan3,Chen Yunying4,Tong Jixiang5,Ning Xiaoni3,Feng Lanjun3,Xu Yuting5,Yang Dagan1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Laboratory Medicine, the First Affiliated Hospital Zhejiang University School of Medicine Hangzhou People's Republic of China

2. Key Laboratory of Clinical In Vitro Diagnostic Techniques of Zhejiang Province Hangzhou People's Republic of China

3. Hangzhou Dian Medical Laboratory Center Co., Ltd Hangzhou People's Republic of China

4. Department of Laboratory Medicine Hangzhou Children's Hospital Hangzhou People's Republic of China

5. Department of Hematology, the First Affiliated Hospital Zhejiang University School of Medicine Hangzhou People's Republic of China

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundThe MC‐80 (Mindray, Shenzhen, China), a newly available artificial intelligence (AI)‐based digital morphology analyzer, is the focus of this study. We aim to compare the leukocyte differential performance of the Mindray MC‐80 with that of the Sysmex DI‐60 and the gold standard, manual microscopy.MethodsA total of 100 abnormal peripheral blood (PB) smears were compared across the MC‐80, DI‐60, and manual microscopy. Sensitivity, specificity, predictive value, and efficiency were calculated according to the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) EP12‐A2 guidelines. Comparisons were made using Bland–Altman analysis and Passing‐Bablok regression analysis. Additionally, within‐run imprecision was evaluated using five samples, each with varying percentages of mature leukocytes and blasts, in accordance with CLSI EP05‐A3 guidelines.ResultsThe within‐run coefficient of variation (%CV) of the MC‐80 for most cell classes in the five samples was lower than that of the DI‐60. Sensitivities for the MC‐80 ranged from 98.2% for nucleated red blood cells (NRBC) to 28.6% for reactive lymphocytes. The DI‐60's sensitivities varied between 100% for basophils and reactive lymphocytes, and 11.1% for metamyelocytes. Both analyzers demonstrated high specificity, negative predictive value, and efficiency, with over 90% for most cell classes. However, the DI‐60 showed relatively lower specificity for lymphocytes (73.2%) and lower efficiency for blasts and lymphocytes (80.1% and 78.6%, respectively) compared with the MC‐80. Bland–Altman analysis indicated that the absolute mean differences (%) ranged from 0.01 to 4.57 in MC‐80 versus manual differential and 0.01 to 3.39 in DI‐60 versus manual differential. After verification by technicians, both analyzers exhibited a very high correlation (r = 0.90–1.00) with the manual differential results in neutrophils, lymphocytes, and blasts.ConclusionsThe Mindray MC‐80 demonstrated good performance for leukocyte differential in PB smears, notably exhibiting higher sensitivity for blasts identification than the DI‐60.

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Biochemistry (medical),Clinical Biochemistry,Hematology,General Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3