Assessment of a five-color flow cytometric assay for verifying automated white blood cell differentials

Author:

HUANG Chun-mei,YU Lian-hui,PU Cheng-wei,WANG Xin,WANG Geng,SHEN Li-song,WANG Jian-zhong,CUI Wei

Abstract

Background White blood cell (WBC) counts and differentials performed using an automated cell counter typically require manual microscopic review. However, this last step is time consuming and requires experienced personnel. We evaluated the clinical efficiency of using flow cytometry (FCM) employing a six-antibody/five-color reagent for verifying automated WBC differentials. Methods A total of 56 apparently healthy samples were assessed using a five-color flow cytometer to verify the normal reference ranges of WBC differentials. WBC differentials of 622 samples were also determined using both a cell counter and FCM. These results were then confirmed using manual microscopic methods. Results The probabilities for all of the parameters of WBC differentials exceeded the corresponding normal reference ranges by no more than 7.5%. The resulting WBC differentials were well correlated between FCM and the cell counter (r >0.88, P <0.001), except in the case of basophils. Neutrophils, lymphocytes, and eosinophils were well correlated between FCM and standard microscopic cytology assessment (r >0.80, P <0.001). The sensitivities of FCM for identification of immature granulocytes and blast cells (72.03% and 22.22%, respectively) were higher than those of the cell counter method (44.92% and 11.11%, respectively). The specificities of FCM were all above 85%, substantially better than those of the cell counter method. Conclusion These five-color FCM assays could be applied to accurately verify abnormal results of automated assessment of WBC differentials.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Reference17 articles.

1. Laboratory productivity and the rate of manual peripheral blood smear review: A college of American pathologists Q-probes study of 95,141 complete blood count determinations performed in 263 institutions.;Novis;Arch Pathol Lab Med,2006

2. The international consensus group for hematology review: Suggested criteria for action following automated CBC and WBC differential analysis.;Barnes;Lab Hematol,2005

3. Development of the personalized criteria for microscopic review following four differen series of hematology analyzer in a Chinese large scale hospital.;Cui;Chin Med J,2010

4. Clinical utility of automated platelet clump count in the screening for ethylene diamine tetraacetic acid-dependent pseudothrombo- cytopenia.;Wu;Chin Med J,2011

5. Between-examiner reproducibility in manual differential leukocyte counting.;Fuentes-Arderiu;Accred Qual Assur,2007

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