White blood cell differentials performance of a new automated digital cell morphology analyzer: Mindray MC‐80

Abstract

AbstractIntroductionThe manual differential count has been recognized for its disadvantages, including large interobserver variability and labor intensiveness. In this light, automated digital cell morphology analyzers have been increasingly adopted in hematology laboratories for their robustness and convenience. This study aims to evaluate the white blood cell differential performance of the Mindray MC‐80, the new automated digital cell morphology analyzer.MethodsThe cell identification performance of Mindray MC‐80 was evaluated for sensitivity and specificity using pre‐classification and post‐classification of each cell class. The method comparison study used manual differentials as the gold standard for calculating Pearson correlation, Passing‐Bablok regression, and Bland–Altman analysis. In addition, the precision study was performed and evaluated.ResultsThe precision was within the acceptable limit for all cell classes. Overall, the specificity of cell identification was higher than 95% for all cell classes. The sensitivity was greater for 95% for most cell classes, except for myelocytes (94.9%), metamyelocytes (90.9%), reactive lymphocytes (89.7%), and plasma cells (60%). Pre‐classification and post‐classification results correlated well with the manual differential results for all the cell types investigated. The regression coefficients were greater than 0.9 for most cell classes except for promyelocytes, metamyelocytes, basophils, and reactive lymphocytes.ConclusionThe performance of Mindray MC‐80 for white blood cell differentials is reliable and seems to be acceptable even in abnormal samples. However, the sensitivity is less than 95% for certain abnormal cell types, so the user should be aware of this limitation where such cells are suspected.