235 152

Cited 0 times in

Performance Evaluation of Body Fluid Cellular Analysis Using the Beckman Coulter UniCel DxH 800, Sysmex XN-350, and UF-5000 Automated Cellular Analyzers

Authors
 Jooyoung Cho  ;  Joowon Oh  ;  Sang-Guk Lee  ;  You-Hee Lee  ;  Jaewoo Song  ;  Jeong-Ho Kim 
Citation
 ANNALS OF LABORATORY MEDICINE, Vol.40(2) : 122-130, 2020 
Journal Title
 ANNALS OF LABORATORY MEDICINE 
ISSN
 2234-3806 
Issue Date
2020
MeSH
Area Under Curve ; Automation ; Body Fluids/cytology* ; Cell Count/instrumentation ; Cell Count/methods* ; Flow Cytometry ; Humans ; Limit of Detection ; ROC Curve ; Reproducibility of Results
Keywords
Analytical performance ; Automated cellular analyzer ; Body fluid ; Differential cell counting ; UF-5000 ; UniCel DxH 800 ; XN-350
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Automated cellular analyzers are expected to improve the analytical performance in body fluid (BF) analysis. We evaluated the analytical performance of three automated cellular analyzers and established optimum reflex analysis guidelines. METHODS: A total of 542 BF samples (88 cerebrospinal fluid [CSF] samples and 454 non-CSF samples) were examined using manual counting and three automated cellular analyzers: UniCel DxH 800 (Beckman Coulter), XN-350 (Sysmex), and UF-5000 (Sysmex). Additionally, 2,779 BF analysis results were retrospectively reviewed. For malignant cell analysis, the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used, and the detection of high fluorescence-BF cells (HF-BFs) using the XN-350 analyzer was compared with cytology results. RESULTS: All three analyzers showed good agreement for total nucleated cell (TNC) and red blood cell (RBC) counts, except for the RBC count in CSF samples using the UniCel DxH 800. However, variable degrees of differences were observed during differential cell counting. For malignant cell analysis, the area under the curve was 0.63 for the XN-350 analyzer and 0.76 for manual counting. We established our own reflex analysis guidelines as follows: HF-BFs <0.7/100 white blood cells (WBCs) is the criterion for quick scans with 100× magnification microscopic examination as a rule-out cut-off, while HF-BFs >83.4/100 WBCs or eosinophils >3.8% are the criteria for mandatory double check confirmation with 1,000× magnification examination. CONCLUSIONS: The three automated analyzers showed good analytical performances. Application of reflex analysis guidelines is recommended for eosinophils and HF-BFs, and manual confirmation is warranted.
Files in This Item:
T202000247.pdf Download
DOI
10.3343/alm.2020.40.2.122
Appears in Collections:
1. College of Medicine (의과대학) > Dept. of Laboratory Medicine (진단검사의학교실) > 1. Journal Papers
Yonsei Authors
Kim, Jeong Ho(김정호) ORCID logo https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2479-0548
Song, Jae Woo(송재우) ORCID logo https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1877-5731
Oh, Joowon(오주원) ORCID logo https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8449-3660
Lee, Sang-Guk(이상국) ORCID logo https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3862-3660
URI
https://ir.ymlib.yonsei.ac.kr/handle/22282913/175484
사서에게 알리기
  feedback

qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Browse

Links