Comparability of haematology profile between QBC (R) Autoread (TM) Plus System and all electronic cell counting instrument (Coulter Counter STKS)

Citation
D. Chiappini et al., Comparability of haematology profile between QBC (R) Autoread (TM) Plus System and all electronic cell counting instrument (Coulter Counter STKS), SCHW MED WO, 130(15), 2000, pp. 545-550
Citations number
7
Categorie Soggetti
General & Internal Medicine
Journal title
SCHWEIZERISCHE MEDIZINISCHE WOCHENSCHRIFT
ISSN journal
00367672 → ACNP
Volume
130
Issue
15
Year of publication
2000
Pages
545 - 550
Database
ISI
SICI code
0036-7672(20000415)130:15<545:COHPBQ>2.0.ZU;2-V
Abstract
Aim: To evaluate whether the QBC(R) Auto-read(TM) Plus System (QBC = Quanti tative Buffy Coat analysis) is suitable for assessment of a complete blood cell count. Method: The QBC(R) Autoread(TM) Plus System is a method for determining a n ine parameter haematology profile including a WBC differential count of cen trifuged or capillary blood. It is based on electrico-optical linear measur ements of the discrete layers of packed blood cells in a microhaematocrit t ube. The study population included 55 healthy individuals and 920 patients. A Coulter Counter STKS was used as a reference instrument. Results: Of a total of 920 probes, 70 had to be excluded due to delayed ana lysis. Out of 850 probes 5.6% were unreadable. Good precision was noted for haemoglobin and haematocrit (CV 1% and 2.2% respectively), as opposed to t he other parameters (CVs ranging from 10.5 to 16.6%). Good accuracy was see n for haemoglobin and haematocrit (R-s 0.982 and 0.955, slope of linear reg ression 1.0 and 0.99, y-distance 0.40 g/l and 0.56% respectively). In contr ast, values for granulocytes and mononuclear cells (lymphocytes, monocytes) were inaccurate (R-s each 0.650, slope 1.53 and 0.77, y-distance -0.76 10( 9)/l and -0.27 10(9)/l respectively). Particularly inaccurate values were s een for leukocyte counts of children suffering from haematological diseases and of children treated in the emergency unit (R-s 0.688 and 0.607, slope 1.09 and 1.43, y-distance -0.02 10(9)/l and -2.95 10(9)/l). In the whole st udy population acceptable values were noted for platelet counts (R-s 0.833, slope 1.20, y-distance -35.54 10(9)/l). Conclusions: Based on the performance found in our study, the QBC Autoread system cannot be widely recommended for assessment of a nine parameter haem atology profile. It is suitable for measuring haemoglobin and haematocrit a nd acceptable for platelets. It is not reliable for measurements of leukocy tes and the differential count.