Use of the Sysmex XT-4000i hematology analyzer in the differentiation of cerebrospinal fluid cells in children

Accuracy of automated analyzers for the estimation of CSF cell counts: A systematic review and meta-analysis

This systematic review evaluates the evidence for accuracy of automated analyzers that estimate cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) white blood cell counts (WBC) compared to manual microscopy. Inclusion criteria of original research articles included human subjects, English language, and manual microscopy comparator. PUBMED, EMBASE and Cochrane Review databases were searched through 2019 and QUADAS-2 Tool was used for assessment of bias. Data were pooled and analyzed by comparison method, using random effects estimation. Among 652 titles, 554 abstracts screened, 104 full-text review, 111 comparisons from 41 studies were included. Pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity (n = 7) were 95% (95%-CI 93%-97%) and 84% (95%-CI: 64%-96%), respectively. Pooled R2 estimates (n = 29) were 0.95 (95%-CI: 0.95-0.96); Pooled spearman rho correlation (n = 27) estimates were 0.95 (95% CI 0.95-0.96). Among those comparisons using Bland-Altman analysis (n = 11) pooled mean difference was estimated at 0.98 (95% CI-0.54-2.5). Among comparisons using Passing-Bablok regressions (n = 14) the pooled slope was estimated to be 1.05 (95% CI 1.03-1.07). Q tests of homogeneity were all significant with the exception of the Bland-Altman comparisons (I2 10%, p value 0.35). There is good overall accuracy for CSF WBC by automated hematologic analyzers. These findings are limited by the small sample sizes and inconsistent validation methodology in the reviewed studies.

Automated Analysis of Cerebrospinal Fluid Cells Using Commercially Available Blood Cell Analysis Devices-A Critical Appraisal

The analysis of cells in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) is a routine procedure that is usually performed manually using the Fuchs–Rosenthal chamber and cell microscopy for cell counting and differentiation. In order to reduce the requirement for manual assessment, automated analyses by devices mainly used for blood cell analysis have been also used for CSF samples. Here, we summarize the current state of investigations using these automated devices and critically review their limitations. Despite technical improvements, the lower limit for reliable leukocyte counts in the CSF is still at approximately 20 cells/µL, to be validated depending on the device. Since the critical range for clinical decisions is in the range of 5–30 cells/µL this implies that cell numbers < 30/µL require a manual confirmation. Moreover, the lower limit of reliable erythrocyte detection by automated devices is at approximately 1000/µL. However, even low erythrocyte numbers may be of clinical importance. In contrast, heavily hemorrhagic samples from neurosurgery may be counted automatically at an acceptable precision more quickly. Finally, cell differentiation by automated devices provides only a rough orientation for lymphocytes, granulocytes and monocytes. Other diagnostically important cell types such as tumor cells, siderophages, blasts and others are not reliably detected. Thus, although the automation may give a gross estimate sufficient for the emergency room situation, each CSF requires a manual microscopy for cytological evaluation for the final report. In conclusion, although automated analysis of CSF cells may provide a first orientation of the cell profile in an individual sample, an additional manual cell count and a microscopic cytology are still required and represent the gold standard.

Automated cell count in body fluids: a review

Body fluid cell counting provides valuable information for the diagnosis and treatment of a variety of conditions. Chamber cell count and cellularity analysis by optical microscopy are considered the gold-standard method for cell counting. However, this method has a long turnaround time and limited reproducibility, and requires highly-trained personnel. In the recent decades, specific modes have been developed for the analysis of body fluids. These modes, which perform automated cell counting, are incorporated into hemocytometers and urine analyzers. These innovations have been rapidly incorporated into routine laboratory practice. At present, a variety of analyzers are available that enable automated cell counting for body fluids. Nevertheless, these analyzers have some limitations and can only be operated by highly-qualified laboratory professionals. In this review, we provide an overview of the most relevant automated cell counters currently available for body fluids, the interpretation of the parameters measured by these analyzers, their main analytical features, and the role of optical microscopy as automated cell counters gain ground.

Use of the Sysmex XT-4000i hematology analyzer in the differentiation of cerebrospinal fluid cells in children

BACKGROUND

Routine analysis of pleocytosis and cellular composition of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) is carried out with a phase-contrast microscope. The use of hematological analyzers seems to be an alternative to the manual method. The aim of the study was to assess the usefulness of the automated technique for counting and differentiating CSF cells in children.

METHODS

The study group consisted of 59 children (28 girls and 31 boys) aged from 4 to 17 years suffering from viral and bacterial meningitis. Children were divided into three subgroups according to CSF cell count: 1st group had a pleocytosis of 6-50 cells/µL, 2nd group-51-100 cells/µL, and 3rd group->100 cells/µL. A reference group involved 32 children (17 girls and 15 boys) aged from 2 to 18 years with a normal range of 0-5 cells/µL. Examination of CSF was performed in parallel by two different method, manual and automated.

RESULTS

The analysis of pleocytosis revealed that the values obtained by the manual method were statistically significantly lower in relation to the values obtained by automated technique in subgroups I and II. The number of mononuclear and polymorphonuclear cells in subgroups I, II, and III determined by both manual and automated methods was comparable.

CONCLUSION

We conclude that automated method cannot fully replace the previously used manual method and some of the dubious cases, such as samples with low pleocytosis rates or abnormal cells indicated by the analyzer, will still require microscopic examination.