Evaluation of an in-house centrifugal hematology analyzer for use in veterinary practice

Objective-To compare CBC results obtained by use of an in-house centrifugal analyzer with results of a reference method. Design-Prospective study. Sample Population-Blood samples from 147 dogs, 42 cats, and 60 horses admit ted to a veterinary teaching hospital and from 24 cows in a commercial dair y herd. Procedure-Results obtained with the centrifugal analyzer were compared with results obtained with an electrical-impedance light-scatter hematology ana lyzer and manual differential cell counting (reference method). Results-The centrifugal analyzer yielded error messages for 50 of 273 (18%) samples. Error messages were most common for samples with values outside e stablished reference ranges. Correlation coefficients ranged from 0.80 to 0 .99 for Hct, 0.55 to 0.90 for platelet count, 0.76 to 0.95 for total WBC co unt, and 0.63 (cattle) to 0.82 (cats) to 0.95 (dogs and horses) for granulo cyte count. Coefficients for mononuclear cell (combined lymphocyte and mono cyte) counts were 0.56, 0.65, 0.68, and 0.92 for cats, horses, dogs, and ca ttle, respectively. Conclusions and Clinical Relevance-Results suggested that there was an exce llent correlation between results of the centrifugal analyzer and results o f the reference method only for Hct in feline, canine, and equine samples; WBC count in canine and equine samples; granulocyte count in canine and equ ine samples; and reticulocyte count in canine samples. However, an inabilit y to identify abnormal cells, the high percentage of error messages, partic ularly for samples with abnormal WBC counts, and the wide confidence interv als precluded reliance on differential cell counts obtained with the centri fugal analyzer.