| Literature DB >> 27449509 |
Dana E Oellers1, Natali Bauer2, Melanie Ginder3, Sigrid Johannes4, Iris Pernecker4, Andreas Moritz2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Canine reticulated platelets (r-PLTs) i.e., juvenile PLTs reflecting thrombopoiesis can be measured automatically with the hematology analyzer Sysmex XT-2000iV using manual gating options. However, the impact of interferences on r-PLT measurements performed with the gates published previously (Pankraz et al., Vet Clin Path 38:30-38, 2009; Gelain et al., High fluorescent platelets fraction in macrothrombocytopenic Norfolk terrier, 2010) is largely unknown. The aim was to compare different published gates for measurement of r-PLTs with the Sysmex XT-2000iV with an own, optimized gate ("Oellers-gate") and to establish reference intervals (RIs) in > 120 dogs. Data of 362 measurements of diseased and healthy dogs were analyzed retrospectively. Several gates were applied and RIs for r-PLTs and platelet indices were established for pet dogs and a group of 153 healthy Beagles kept under defined housing conditions. Intra-assay precision (CV) was also assessed.Entities:
Keywords: Canine; Hematology analyzer; RNA-rich platelets
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27449509 PMCID: PMC4957853 DOI: 10.1186/s12917-016-0779-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Vet Res ISSN: 1746-6148 Impact factor: 2.741
Fig. 1Schematic diagram showing the applied gates: “Gelain-gate” (a), “Pankraz-gate” (b) and “Oellers-gate” (c). Abbreviations: FSC, forward scatter; SFL, fluorescence intensity; RBC, erythrocytes; LFR, MFR, HFR, low, medium and high fluorescence ratio of reticulocytes; PLT, platelets; r-PLT, reticulated platelets; PLT-O total, green gate with all optically measured platelets; red gate, gate with r-PLTs; pink gate 4, gate with frequent interferences in the “Gelain-gate” and “Pankraz-gate”; white gate, can be ignored, not part of respective measurements
Fig. 2Scattergrams of the PLT-O channel of the Sysmex XT-2000iV analyzing whole blood samples of a healthy dog (a-c) and a dog with increased platelet and r-PLT count (d-f). The applied gates are shown schematically. PLT Total detects all platelets, (a, d) r-PLT “Gelain – gate” based on publication of Gelain et al., (b, e) r-PLT “Pankraz-gate” based on the publication of Pankraz et al., (c, f) r-PLT “Oellers-gate” shows the novel area for counting r-PLTs. Abbreviations: FSC, forward scatter; SFL, fluorescence intensity
Classification in categories of underlying etiology in diseased dogs
| Category of disease | Absolute number (percentage) |
|---|---|
| Inflammatory diseases | 31 (19.87 %) |
| Cardiovascular diseases | 20 (12.82 %) |
| Neoplasia | 18 (11.54 %) |
| Diseases of the musculoskeletal system | 17 (10.90 %) |
| Monitoring after surgery | 8 (5.13 %) |
| Immune-mediated diseases | |
| - Immune mediated anemia ( | 8 (5.13 %) |
| Portosystemic shunt | 6 (3.85 %) |
| Diseases of the central nervous system | 4 (2.56 %) |
| Non-regenerative anemia | 4 (2.56 %) |
| DIC | 2 (1.28 %) |
| Endocrinologic disease | 2 (1.28 %) |
| Thrombosis | 2 (1.28 %) |
| Regenerative anemia (unknown etiology) | 1 (0.64 %) |
| Hemolytic anemia (unknown etiology) | 1 (0.64 %) |
| Other diseases | 32 |
Abbreviations: DIC disseminated intravascular coagulation
Correlation and differences between the different gates for canine r-PLT measurement (n = 362) of the Sysmex XT-2000iV
| Variable | rs | Slope (95 % CI) | Intercept (95 % CI) | Bias (95 % limits of agreement) | Adjusted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| r-PLT “Gelain-gate”(%) vs. r-PLT “Oellers-gate”(%) | 1.00 | 1.01 (1.01–1.01) | 0.00 (0.00–0.00) | 0.1 (−1.3–1.6) | ns |
| r-PLT “Pankraz-gate”(%) vs. r-PLT “Gelain-gate”(%) | 0.89 | 2.83 (2.70–2.99) | 0.18 (0.12–0.23) | 2.0 (−4.3–8.3) | <0.0001 |
| r-PLT “Pankraz-gate”(%) vs. r-PLT “Oellers-gate”(%) | 0.88 | 2.92 (2.78–3.11) | 0.17 (0.10–0.22) | 2.1 (−4.9–9.2) | <0.0001 |
Abbreviations: CI confidence interval, ns not significant, vs. versus
Median, minimum and maximum r-PLT counts of the analyzed group of healthy and diseased dogs (n = 362)
| Variable | Median | Minimum | Maximum |
|---|---|---|---|
| r-PLT “Gelain-gate”(%) | 1.33 | 0.11 | 54.89 |
| r-PLT “Pankraz-gate”(%) | 0.40 | 0.0 | 35.02 |
| r-PLT “Oellers-gate”(%) | 1.33 | 0.12 | 57.34 |
Fig. 3Samples of diseased dogs with suspected interferences. (a-b) Differences in the r-PLT percentage between the “Gelain-gate” (a) and the “Oellers-gate” (b) in a sample with suspected interferences of erythrocytes and reticulocytes. The white arrow shows the difference between the previously used gates and the novel “Oellers-gate”. (c) A sample with dots suspicious for WBC fragments appearing in the PLT-O channel and the gate for r-PLTs. Abbreviations: FSC, forward scatter; SFL, fluorescence intensity
Intra-assay repeatability of r-PLT and platelet indices using the Sysmex XT-2000iV
| Variable | CV (%) | Mean ± SD |
|---|---|---|
| r-PLT “Gelain-gate”(%) | 22.02 | 6.98 ± 1.54 |
| r-PLT “Pankraz-gate”(%) | 41.14 | 1.81 ± 0.75 |
| r-PLT “Oellers-gate”(%) | 22.04 | 7.02 ± 1.55 |
| r-PLT “Gelain-gate”(× 109/L) | 21.36 | 7.11 ± 1.52 |
| r-PLT “Pankraz-gate”(× 109/L) | 40.10 | 1.84 ± 0.74 |
| r-PLT “Oellers-gate”(× 109/L) | 21.38 | 7.1 ± 1.52 |
| PLT-I (× 109/L) | 2.98 | 128.32 ± 3.83 |
| PLT-O (× 109/L) | 5.56 | 121.2 ± 6.73 |
| MPV (fL) | 1.86 | 13.2 ± 0.24 |
| PDW (fL) | 6.75 | 17.77 ± 1.20 |
| P-LCR (%) | 2.72 | 47.7 ± 1.30 |
| PCT (%) | 4.52 | 0.17 ± 0.01 |
r-PLT, PLT-I, PLT-O: n = 25 repeated measurements
MPV, PDW, P-LCR, PCT: n = 7 repeated measurements
Abbreviations: CV coefficient of variation, SD standard deviation, PLT-I platelet count with impedance, PLT-O platelet count in optical fluorescence analysis, MPV mean platelet volume, PDW calculated distribution width of platelets, P-LCR platelet-large cell ratio, PCT plateletcrit, L liter, fL femtoliter
Reference ranges for reticulated platelets (r-PLT) in healthy dogs independent of the breed as well as in Beagles and non-Beagles using the Sysmex XT-2000iV
| Variable | All dogs ( | Beagles ( | Non-Beagles ( | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.5th Percentile (90 % CI) | 97.5th Percentile (90 % CI) | Method | 2.5th Percentile (90 % CI) | 97.5th Percentile (90 % CI) | Method | 2.5th Percentile (90 % CI) | 97.5th Percentile (90 % CI) | Method | |
| r-PLT “Gelain-gate”(%) | 0.2 (0.1–0.3) | 3.7 (2.7–6.9) | Nonparametric | 0.2 (0.1–0.3) | 2.4 (2.1–4.5) | Nonparametric | 0.2 (0.1–0.3) | 6.8 (4.8–9.3) | Robust, Box-Cox-Transformation |
| r-PLT “Pankraz-gate”(%) | 0.0 (0.0–0.0) | 1.2 (1.0–2.2) | Nonparametric | 0.0 (0.0–0.0) | 1.0 (0.7–1.3) | Nonparametric | 0.0 (0.0–0.0) | 2.2 (1.6–2.8) | Robust, Box-Cox-Transformation |
| r-PLT “Oellers-gate”(%) | 0.2 (0.1–0.3) | 3.9 (2.8–7.0) | Nonparametric | 0.2 (0.1–0.3) | 2.4 (2.1–4.5) | Nonparametric | 0.2 (0.1–0.3) | 7.1 (5.0–9.7) | Robust, Box-Cox-Transformation |
| r-PLT “Gelain-gate”(× 109/L) | 0.4 (0.3–0.6) | 5.7 (4.9–8.7) | Nonparametric | 0.4 (0.3–0.5) | 4.2 (3.7–6.5) | Nonparametric | 0.3 (0.1–0.4) | 6.4 (5.0–8.0) | Robust, Box-Cox-Transformation |
| r-PLT “Pankraz-gate”(× 109/L) | 0.1 (0.0–0.1) | 2.1 (1.8–2.9) | Nonparametric | 0.1 (0.0–0.1) | 1.7 (1.4–2.2) | Nonparametric | 0.0 (0.0–0.1) | 3.2 (2.7–3.2) | Nonparametric |
| r-PLT “Oellers-gate”(× 109/L) | 0.4 (0.3–0.6) | 5.6 (4.9–8.7) | Nonparametric | 0.4 (0.3–0.5) | 4.2 (3.6–6.4) | Nonparametric | 0.5 (0.3–0.7) | 10.0 (7.5–12.6) | Robust, Box-Cox-Transformation |
Abbreviations: CI confidence interval, for remainder abbreviations: see Table 4
Fig. 4Reference interval and data distributions for r-PLTs of 193 healthy dogs measured with the Sysmex XT-2000iV and three different gating methods. Blue bars show the observed data distribution, the purple curve represents Gaussian fit. The blue vertical lines are consistent with the lower and upper limits of the reference interval; the dotted lines indicate the 90 % confidence interval. Abbreviations: r-PLT “Gelain-gate”: gate based on the publication of Gelain et al.; r-PLT “Pankraz-gate”: gate based on the publication of Pankraz et al., r-PLT “Oellers-gate”: optimized gate for measurement of r-PLTs
Reference ranges for platelet indices in healthy dogs independent of the breed as well as in Beagles and non-Beagles using the Sysmex XT-2000iV
| Variable | All dogs ( | Beagles ( | Non-Beagles ( | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.5th Percentile (90 % CI) | 97.5th Percentile (90 % CI) | Method | 2.5th Percentile (90 % CI) | 97.5th Percentile (90 % CI) | Method | 2.5th Percentile (90 % CI) | 97.5th Percentile (90 % CI) | Method | |
| PLT-I (× 109/L) | 161.8 (149.0–175.0) | 425.0 (381.0–438.0) | Non-parametric | 176.7 (155.0–194.0) | 406.9 (377.0–452.0) | Non-parametric | 125.6 (115.5–143.7) | 452.0 (405.3–501.8) | Robust, Box-Cox-Trans-formation |
| PLT-O (× 109/L) | 150.9 (141.0–169.0) | 397.5 (355.0–416.0) | Non-parametric | 172.8 (161.0–184.0) | 377.1 (351.0–416.0) | Non-parametric | 121.6 (110.6–137.1) | 418.9 (375.2–467.7) | Robust, Box-Cox-Trans-formation |
| MPV (fL) | 8.6 (8.3–8.9) | 12.5 (12.1–12.8) | Non-parametric | 8.8 (8.6–8.9) | 12.3 (12.1–13.4) | Non-parametric | 7.9 (7.4–8.4) | 12.8 (12.3–13.4) | Robust |
| PDW (fL) | 8.8 (8.4–9.2) | 16.6 (14.7–18.0) | Non-parametric | 9.0 (8.7–9.3) | 15.4 (14.5–18.0) | Non-parametric | 7.9 (7.5–8.6) | 18.3 (16.4–20.5) | Robust, Box-Cox-Transformation |
| P-LCR (%) | 14.1 (12.1–15.9) | 43.0 (41.3–44.7) | Non-parametric | 15.5 (14.1–16.8) | 43.1 (41.3–48.2) | Non-parametric | 9.1 (5.3–13.1) | 45.8 (41.5–49.8) | Parametric |
| PCT (%) | 0.2 (0.2–0.2) | 0.4 (0.4–0.4) | Non-parametric | 0.2 (0.2–0.2) | 0.4 (0.4–0.5) | Non-parametric | 0.2 (0.1–0.2) | 0.4 (0.4–0.5) | Robust, Box-Cox-Transformation |
Abbreviations: CI confidence interval; for remainder abbreviations: see Table 4