Literature DB >> 25925737

Interlaboratory Reproducibility of Blood Morphology Using the Digital Microscope.

Jurgen A Riedl1, Karlijn Stouten2, Huib Ceelie3, Joke Boonstra4, Mark-David Levin5, Warry van Gelder6.   

Abstract

Differential counting of peripheral blood cells is an important diagnostic tool. However, manual morphological analysis using the microscope is time-consuming and requires highly trained personnel. The digital microscope is capable of performing an automated peripheral blood cell differential, which is as reliable as manual classification by experienced laboratory technicians. To date, information concerning the interlaboratory variation and quality of cell classification by independently operated digital microscopy systems is limited. We compared four independently operated digital microscope systems for their ability in classifying the five main peripheral blood cell classes and detection of blast cells in 200 randomly selected samples. Set against the averaged results, the R(2) values for neutrophils ranged between 0.90 and 0.96, for lymphocytes between 0.83 and 0.94, for monocytes between 0.77 and 0.82, for eosinophils between 0.70 and 0.78, and for blast cells between 0.94 and 0.99. The R(2) values for the basophils were between 0.28 and 0.34. This study shows that independently operated digital microscopy systems yield reproducible preclassification results when determining the percentages of neutrophils, eosinophils, lymphocytes, monocytes, and blast cells in a peripheral blood smear. Detection of basophils was hampered by the low incidence of this cell class in the samples.
© 2015 Society for Laboratory Automation and Screening.

Keywords:  blood differential; digital microscopy; hematology; preclassification

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25925737     DOI: 10.1177/2211068215584278

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Lab Autom        ISSN: 2211-0682


  2 in total

Review 1.  "Blasts" in myeloid neoplasms - how do we define blasts and how do we incorporate them into diagnostic schema moving forward?

Authors:  Xueyan Chen; Jonathan R Fromm; Kikkeri N Naresh
Journal:  Leukemia       Date:  2022-01-19       Impact factor: 11.528

2.  How Reproducible Is the Data from Sysmex DI-60 in Leukopenic Samples?

Authors:  Sumi Yoon; Mina Hur; Gun Hyuk Lee; Minjeong Nam; Hanah Kim
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2021-11-23
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.