Body Fluid Cell Counts by Automated Methods

Automated and manual microscopic analyses for leukocyte differential counts in exudative pleural effusions: Real-world disagreement and clinical application

Differential leukocyte counts of pleural fluid are routinely recommended for the early diagnosis and management of exudative pleural effusions. Rapid automated cellular analysis agrees strongly with standard manual microscopic counts and has become a reality in many clinical laboratories. However, discordant results sometimes observed between automated and manual analyses raise concern about using automated analysis to aid prompt differential diagnosis. This study aimed to evaluate the real-world disagreement between automated and manual leukocyte analyses in exudative pleural effusions and to investigate whether the discordant results occur in specific cellular ranges or randomly. We conducted a retrospective study of patients who were diagnosed with parapneumonic pleural effusions (PPE), tuberculous pleural effusions (TPE), and malignant pleural effusions (MPE) between September 2018 and December 2020. Differential and predominant leukocyte counts were performed using an automated XN-350 analyzer with a two-part differential count consisting of polymorphonuclear (PMN) and mononuclear (MN) leukocytes and a manual method with Wright-stained cytospin slides. We compared the two methods on cases of 109 PPEs, 50 TPEs, and 116 MPEs. Although the overall correlation between the two methods for differential leukocyte counts was excellent, there were etiologic variations; MPEs showed a lower correlation compared to PPEs and TPEs. Automated-PMN predominance almost corresponded to manual cytospin-neutrophilic predominance. In contrast, ~10% of the automated-MN predominance did not correspond with the cytospin-lymphocytic predominance. These discrepancies occurred most in the automated-MN% range of 51% to 60%, followed by 61% to 70%. The PMN% range ≥50% and <30% on the automated analysis reliably corresponds to the neutrophilic and lymphocytic predominance, respectively. However, the MN% range of 51% to 70% may not coincide with lymphocytic predominance on manual cytospin analysis. This range leaves the potential cause of exudative pleural effusions open.

Serous body fluid evaluation using the new automated haematology analyser Mindray BC-6800Plus

OBJECTIVES

Cellular analysis of body fluids (BF) has clinical relevance in several medical conditions. The objective of this study is twofold: (1) evaluate the analytical performance of the BF mode of Mindray BC-6800 Plus compared to manual counts under microscopy and (2) analyse if the high-fluorescent cell counts provided by the analyser (HF-BF) are useful to detect malignancy.

METHODS

A total of 285 BF was analysed: 250 corresponding to patients without neoplasia and 35 to patients with malignant diseases. Manual differential counts were performed in BF with ≥250 cells/μL. Percentages and absolute counts were obtained on the BC-6800Plus for total nucleated cells (TC-BF), mononuclear, polymorphonuclear and HF-BF. Statistical analysis was performed using Mann-Whitney U-test, Spearman's correlation, Passing-Bablok regression, Bland-Altman graph and ROC curve.

RESULTS

To compare manual and automatic total cell counts, samples were divided in three groups: <250, 250-1,000 and >1,000 cells/μL. Correlation was good in all cases (r=0.72, 0.73 and 0.92, respectively) without significant differences between both methods (p=0.65, 0.39 and 0.30, respectively). The concordance between methods showed values of 90%. Considering malignant samples, median HF-BF values showed significant higher values (102 cells/μL) with respect to non-malignant (4 cells/μL) (p<0.001). The cut-off value of 8.5 HF-BF/μL was able to discriminate samples containing malignant cells showing sensitivity and specificity values of 89 and 71%, respectively. Considering both, HF-BF and TC-BF values, sensitivity and specificity values were 100 and 53%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study reveals that the Mindray BC-6800Plus offers an accurate and acceptable performance, showing results consistent with the manual method. It is recommended to consider both HF-BF and TC-BF values for the screening of the microscopic evaluation to ensure the detection of all malignant samples.

Clinical application of an algorithm to screen for malignant cells in body fluids using an automated hematology analyzer

INTRODUCTION

The detection of malignant cells in body fluids (BF) with an automated hematology analyzer has been proposed as an alternative to morphological examination owing to its various advantages; however, its limitations have also been highlighted. In this study, we devised a practical algorithm to screen for malignant cells in BFs using an automated hematology analyzer.

METHODS

A total of 558 BF samples, including 232 cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) samples and 326 non-CSF samples, were consecutively collected. Thereafter, the results obtained using the BF mode of Sysmex XN-350 (Sysmex, Kobe, Japan) were compared with the cytological diagnosis. A cutoff was also established to screen for malignant cells using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis based on the final clinical judgment.

RESULTS

The automated hematology analyzer showed a moderate correlation or good agreement with the existing cytological diagnosis. Further, of the ROC curves for detecting malignant cells, the absolute value of highly fluorescent cells on BF (HF-BF) in total body fluids showed the highest area under the curve (0.85 [95% confidence interval 0.82-88], p < .0001, Youden index >7×10⁶ /L, sensitivity 93%, and specificity 65%).

CONCLUSION

An automated hematology analyzer could function as a complement to cytological examination. We propose a practical and comprehensive algorithm for cytological examination that requires low- and high-resolution microscopy based on the absolute value of HF-BF in BF samples suspected of malignancy. This algorithm can more usefully detect malignant cells while taking advantage of the automated analyzer and cytological examination.

Performance evaluation of automated cell counts compared with reference methods for body fluid analysis

OBJECTIVES

Cellular analysis of body fluids (BFs) can assist clinicians for the diagnosis of many medical conditions. The aim of this work is the evaluation of the analytical performance of the UF-5000 body fluid mode (UF-BF) analyzer compared to the gold standard method (optical microscopy, OM) and to XN-1000 (XN-BF), another analyzer produced by the same manufacturer (Sysmex) and with a similar technology for BF analysis.

METHODS

One hundred BF samples collected in K₃EDTA tubes were analyzed by UF-BF, XN-BF and OM. The agreement was evaluated using Passing and Bablok regression and Bland-Altman plot analysis. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were selected for evaluating the diagnostic agreement between OM classification and UF-BF parameters.

RESULTS

Comparison between UF-BF and OM, in all BF types, showed Passing and Bablok's slope comprised between 0.99 (polymorphonuclear cells count, PMN-BF) and 1.39 (mononuclear cells count, MN-BF), the intercepts ranged between 26.47 (PMN-BF parameter) and 226.80 (white blood cell count). Bland-Altman bias was comprised between 7.3% (total cell count, TC-BF) and 52.9% (MN-BF). Comparison between UF-BF and XN-BF in all BF showed slopes ranged between 1.07 (TC-BF and PMN-BF) and 1.16 (MN-BF), intercepts ranged between 8.30 (PMN) and 64.78 (WBC-BF). Bland-Altman bias ranged between 5.8 (TC-BF) and 21.1% (MN-BF). The ROC curve analysis showed an area under the curve ranged between 0.9664 and 1.000.

CONCLUSIONS

UF-BF shows very good performance for the differential counts of cells in ascitic, pleural and synovial fluids and therefore it is useful to screen and count cells in this type of BF.

Performance of Abbott Alinity hq hematology analyzer for automated cell counting of body fluids

INTRODUCTION

Body fluid cell counting and differentiation provide essential information for diagnosis and monitoring of diverse pathologies. We evaluated the performance of the newly launched Abbott Alinity hq hematology analyzer for automated cell counting in body fluids and compared red blood cell (RBC) and total nucleated cell (TNC) counts with the Cell-Dyn Sapphire automated hematology analyzer. Differential counts were compared with microscopic differentiation on cytocentrifuged preparations.

METHODS

Background concentration limits, limit of detection (LOD), linearity, imprecision, functional sensitivity and carryover were evaluated. For method comparison, we collected 172 body fluids (17 continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis fluids, 56 cerebrospinal fluids and 99 serous fluids).

RESULTS

Background concentration limits were ≤1000 cells/μL for RBC counts and ≤3 cells/μL for TNC counts. The LOD was 1000 RBC/µL and 5 TNC/µL. Results from linear regression analysis revealed excellent linearity. Functional sensitivity was 3000 cells/µL for RBC counts and 50 cells/µL for TNC counts. Carryover was 0.6% and 0.1% for TNC and RBC, respectively. The Alinity hq shows good clinical performance.

CONCLUSION

We demonstrated comparable performance for body fluid cell counting between the Alinity hq analyzer and the Cell-Dyn Sapphire. The Alinity hq can be very useful as a screening tool for body fluid cell counting.

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.

Evaluation of automated synovial fluid total cell count and percent polymorphonuclear leukocytes on a Sysmex XN-1000 analyzer for identifying patients at risk of septic arthritis

BACKGROUND

Total cell counts (TC-BF) and percent polymorphonuclear cells (%PMN) of synovial fluid (SF) aspirates provide important cues for the timely diagnosis and management of septic arthritis. To facilitate faster turnaround time, we compared automated to manual TC-BF and differential counts in order to identify reporting cut-offs for automated TC-BF and %PMN that would allow release of automated results concordant with manual counts and differentials.

METHODS

Automated TC-BF and %PMN counts of a non-validated analyzer (Analyzer-B in STAT laboratory) were compared to a validated analyzer (Analyzer-A) and manual TC-BF counts and cytospin differentials. Concordance and %differences of Analyzer-B versus Analyzer-A and manual counts were assessed by linear regression analysis and Bland-Altman comparison.

RESULTS

Overall, automated and manual counts displayed good correlation. A majority of samples demonstrated unacceptable (>20%) differences between automated and manual counts at lower TC-BF (<10,000 cells/μl) and %PMN (<60%).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on good overall correlation and fewer samples with unacceptable (>20%) differences between automated and manual counts, we adopted TC-BF > 10,000 cells/μl and %PMN > 60% as cutoffs for reporting automated counts. These cutoffs minimize differences between automated and manual cell counts and differentials and would allow rapid automated reporting in the vast majority of septic arthritis cases.

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

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.

Two-site evaluation of a new workflow for the detection of malignant cells on the Sysmex XN-1000 body fluid analyzer

INTRODUCTION

The presence of high fluorescent cells (HF-BF) on the Sysmex XN-1000 hematology analyzers has gained interest regarding the prediction of malignant cells in body fluids, but lacks sensitivity. We aimed to increase this sensitivity by combining HF-BF value, automated results, and clinical information.

METHODS

We evaluated a new workflow for the management of body fluids in the hematology laboratory, including the HF-BF criterion and clinical information. In two laboratories, 1623 serous fluids were retrospectively analyzed on the XN-1000 BF mode. All samples were morphologically screened for malignant cells. Optimal HF-BF cutoffs were determined to predict their presence. Thereafter, the added value of clinical information was evaluated. Other reflex testing rules (eosinophilic count >5% and presence of the WBC Abnormal Scattergram flag) were also used to refine our workflow.

RESULTS

Optimal HF-BF cutoffs in the two hematology centers were 108 and 45 cells/µL, yielding a sensitivity/specificity of 66.7/93.6% and 86.8/66.6% for malignant cell detection. When adding clinical information, sensitivity/specificity evolved to 100.0/68.9% and 100.0%/not determined. Of 104 samples containing malignant cells, 97 had positive clinical information; the remainder had a HF-BF > cutoff.

CONCLUSION

Combining clinical information and HF-BF reached 100% sensitivity for malignant cell detection in body fluid analysis. Lack of robustness of the optimal HF-BF cutoff deserves the use of local cutoffs. Rapid automated results reporting from the XN-1000 BF mode are also feasible in clinical practice. Prospective evaluation of the workflow is needed before its implementation in clinical practice.

Laboratory testing of extravascular body fluids: National recommendations on behalf of the Croatian Society of Medical Biochemistry and Laboratory Medicine. Part I - Serous fluids

Extravascular body fluids (EBF) analysis can provide useful information in the differential diagnosis of conditions that caused their accumulation. Their unique nature and particular requirements accompanying EBF analysis need to be recognized in order to minimize possible negative implications on patient safety. This recommendation was prepared by the members of the Working group for extravascular body fluid samples (WG EBFS). It is designed to address the total testing process and clinical significance of tests used in EBF analysis. The recommendation begins with a chapter addressing validation of methods used in EBF analysis, and continues with specific recommendations for serous fluids analysis. It is organized in sections referring to the preanalytical, analytical and postanalytical phase with specific recommendations presented in boxes. Its main goal is to assist in the attainment of national harmonization of serous fluid analysis and ultimately improve patient safety and healthcare outcomes. This recommendation is intended to all laboratory professionals performing EBF analysis and healthcare professionals involved in EBF collection and processing. Cytological and microbiological evaluations of EBF are beyond the scope of this document.

Factors to Consider When Assessing the Diagnostic Accuracy of Synovial Leukocyte Count in Periprosthetic Joint Infection

Synovial white blood cell (WBC) count and the percentage of polymorphonuclear leucocytes (PMN%) is one of the diagnostic criteria to diagnose a periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Although the test is widely available, the diagnostic accuracy of proposed cut-off levels are influenced by several factors, such as: the affected joint, co-morbid conditions, the causative microorganism and the gathering and processing of samples in the laboratory. In this narrative review we provide an overview on how and to what extent these factors can affect the synovial WBC count and PMN% in synovial fluid.

The diagnostic ability of high-fluorescent cells combined with carcinoembryonic antigen for malignant pleural effusion

INTRODUCTION

High-fluorescent cells (HFCs) that are detected with an automated hematology analyzer may be useful for the detection of tumor cells; however, the diagnostic ability of HFCs for differentiating malignant pleural effusion is limited. The aim of this study was to investigate the diagnostic value of the combined detection of HFCs with the tumor marker carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) for the identification of malignant hydrothorax.

METHODS

A total of 115 pleural effusions were collected. HFCs, including the relative counts (HF-BF%) and absolute counts (HF-BF#), were analyzed using the BF mode of a Sysmex XN9000 hematology analyzer. Simultaneously, the CEA level from the same patient was measured by an electrochemiluminescence method. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was employed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of HFCs separately or combined with CEA analysis for malignant diseases.

RESULTS

The levels of HF-BF#, HF-BF%, and CEA in the malignant effusion group were significantly higher than those in the benign control group. The diagnostic value of the HF-BF# and HF-BF% for malignant pleural effusion was low to moderate, and the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.663 and 0.715, respectively. The CEA detection showed a moderate diagnostic ability, and the AUC was 0.832. The AUC for the combined methods was 0.860 and 0.890, respectively. The cutoff levels of the HF-BF#, HF-BF%, and CEA levels were 29.5 × 10⁶ /L, 5.6/100 WBC, and 4.795 ng/mL, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The combined detection of high-fluorescent cells with the BF mode and CEA testing may be a good indication for malignancy.

Lack of harmonization in high fluorescent cell automated counts with body fluids mode in ascitic, pleural, synovial, and cerebrospinal fluids

INTRODUCTION

Cellular analysis in body fluids (BFs) provides important diagnostic information in various pathological settings. This study was hence aimed at comparing automated cell count obtained with Mindray BC-6800 (BC-BF) vs Sysmex XN-series (XN-BF) and evaluating other quantitative and qualitative information provided by these analyzers in ascitic (AF), pleural (PF), synovial (SF), and cerebrospinal (CSF) fluids.

METHODS

Three hundred and fifty-one samples (99 AFs, 45 PFs, 75 SFs, and 132 CSFs) were analyzed in parallel with BC-BF, XN-BF, and optical microscopy (OM). The study also included the assessment of diagnostic agreement among BC-BF, XN-BF, and OM.

RESULTS

The comparison of BC-BF vs XN-BF yielded slopes of Passing and Bablok regression always comprised between 0.9 and 1.0 except for EO-BF and HF-BF, whilst the intercepts ranged from -0.4 for MN-BF and 12.0 for PMN-BF. The bias was comprised between -103.3% and 67.1% for HF-BF and EO-BF, respectively. A significant bias was found for TC-BF, WBC-BF, HF-BF (negative bias) and for PMN-BF and EO-BF (positive bias). The agreement (Cohen's kappa) between XN-BF and BC-BF was always ≥0.7, ranging between 0.87 in CSFs and 0.94 in AFs, and that with OM was similar (ie, 0.85 and 0.96).

CONCLUSION

The cytometric analysis of BF samples using BC-BF and XN-BF is clinically favorable when appropriately combined with OM. Quantitative and qualitative parameters displayed optimal agreement, whilst instrument-specific cut-offs should be defined and implemented for HF-BF and EO-BF. Further efforts should be made for achieving better harmonization in cytometric analysis of BF samples.

Two-site evaluation of the diagnostic performance of the Sysmex XN Body Fluid (BF) module for cell count and differential in Cerebrospinal Fluid

INTRODUCTION

Cellular analysis in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) provides important diagnostic information in many pathological settings. The aim of this two-site study was to evaluate the Sysmex XN Body Fluid mode (XN-BF) for cell analysis of CSF compared to light microscopy (LM).

METHODS

Two hundred and seven consecutive CSF samples were analyzed in parallel with XN-BF and LM. The study also included the estimation of the limit of blank (LoB), limit of detection (LoD), limit of quantitation (LoQ), carry-over and linearity of XN-BF module.

RESULTS

LoQ of white blood cells (WBC) was 3×10⁶  cells/L; linearity was good and carry-over negligible. XN-BF parameters were compared to LM for the following cell classes: total cells, WBC, polymorphonuclear (PMN), and mononuclear (MN) cells. The bias ranged from 1.3 to 15.2×10⁶  cells/L. The receiver operating characteristics curve analysis for WBC showed an area under the curve of 0.98, and the global diagnostic agreement was 95% at a cutoff of 5×10⁶  cells/L.

CONCLUSIONS

XN-BF provides rapid and accurate counts in clinically relevant ranges of CSF values, thus providing a valuable alternative to conventional LM analysis. However, microscopic review remains advisable in samples with abnormal cell counts or high fluorescent (HF-BF) cell parameter exceeding 5×10⁶  cells/L.

Evaluation of biological fluid analysis using the sysmex XN automatic hematology analyzer

BACKGROUND

Hematological cytometers with a biological fluid module could potentially correct the limitations of the manual chamber method. This study evaluates the agreement between the manual technique and the Sysmex XN-1000 analyzer for white blood cell (WBC) and red blood cell (RBC) counts, as well as for leukocyte differentiation in different types of fluids. This study also evaluates the advantages of incorporating the technique in routine laboratory work.

METHODS

One hundred and three fluid samples examined were 45 ascite (AF), 21 synovial (SF), 33 pleural (PF), and 31 cerebrospinal (CSF) fluid samples. All cell counting was performed with a Sysmex XN-1000 and a Fuchs-Rosenthal counting chamber. May Gründwald-Giemsa stain was used for manual WBC differentiation. The manual analysis data were obtained in duplicate by the same two observers. Passing-Bablok regression and the Kappa index were used to evaluate the interchangeability and concordance.

RESULTS

Good agreement was observed for WBC differentiation in all fluids and for WBC counts in SF and PF. An optimal Kappa index was obtained, which indicated agreement and clinical significance for WBC and RBC counts in CSF and for RBC counts in PF. There was disagreement for WBC and RBC analysis in AF, with significantly higher results from the Sysmex XN-1000 than from the manual method. A reduction in laboratory response time was observed when using the automatic method.

CONCLUSIONS

Except for AF, the Sysmex XN-1000 results agree with those of the manual method, although to different degrees depending on the fluid type. © 2017 International Clinical Cytometry Society.

A New Automated Technology for Cerebrospinal Fluid Cell Counts: Comparison of Accuracy and Clinical Impact of GloCyte, Sysmex XN, and Manual Methods

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of the study was to compare the performance of GloCyte (Advanced Instruments, Norwood, MA), a new semiautomated instrument for cerebrospinal fluid cell counting, with the manual hemocytometer method and the automated Sysmex XN (Sysmex, Kobe, Japan) body fluid mode. The clinical impact of replacing the manual method with either automated method was determined.

METHODS

Fifty-seven samples from 38 patients were analyzed by all three methods. Pearson correlation and Passing-Bablok regression were used to compare methods. Cytospin smears were reviewed on all samples, and clinical histories were obtained.

RESULTS

There was a strong linear relationship between the manual and automated methods for WBC counts ( R  = 0.988 for GloCyte; R  = 0.980 for Sysmex XN). Positive bias was absent or negligible for WBC counts less than 30/μL. GloCyte and manual RBC counts were equivalent. There were no samples for which replacement of manual WBC counts by automated counts would have changed the diagnosis. Both automated methods showed improved precision for WBC counts compared with the manual method.

CONCLUSIONS

Replacing manual WBC counts by GloCyte or Sysmex XN WBC counts would improve consistency of results without compromising diagnostic accuracy.

Continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis, ascitic and pleural body fluids evaluation with the Mindray BC-6800 hematology analyzer

BACKGROUND

Accurate evaluation of hematology analyzers is recommended before these devices can be broadly introduced for the routine testing of continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD), ascitic, and pleural fluids.

METHODS

We evaluated the performance of Mindray BC-6800 for white blood cell (WBC) and differential cell count in 50 CAPD, 60 ascitic and 40 pleural compared with manual microscopy. Within-run precision, limit of blank (LoB), limit of detection (LoD), limit of quantitation (LoQ), and carryover were assessed.

RESULTS

The Passing-Bablok regression in all fluids showed the following equations: y_WBC =1.05x+3.31 (95%CI slope 0.95 to 1.12; intercept -0.25 to 5.52); y_MN =0.85x+15.63 (95%CI slope 0.72 to 1.05; intercept -24.18 to 84.47); and y_PMN =1.21x+13.37 (95%CI slope 1.03 to 1.35; intercept 4.00 to 32.47) with bias 78 cells/μL. The AUC for clinical PMN cut-off was 0.88 (95%CI: 0.77 to 0.98). In ascitic, pleural, and CAPD fluids the AUC for clinical PMN cut-off were 0.88 (95%CI: 0.63 to 1.00), 0.83 (95%CI: 0.68 to 0.99), and 1.00 (95%CI: 1.00 to 1.00) respectively. CV ranged from 3%-34%. LoB of 3 cell/μL was verified. LoD and LoQ reported the same result (8 cells/μL). Carry over never exceeded 0.05%.

CONCLUSION

The effectiveness of BC-6800 to categorize cells from different body fluids was not compromised by the slight positive bias observed. This conclusion is supported by the high AUC and agreement between the automated method and the reference method. The results show that BC-6800 offers rapid, accurate, and reproducible results for clinical management of CAPD, ascitic, and pleural fluids.

Extent of agreement between the body fluid model of Sysmex XN-20 and the manual microscopy method

BACKGROUND

Although the correlations concerning cellular component analysis between the Sysmex XN-20 body fluid (BF) model and manual microscopy have been investigated by several studies, the extent of agreement between these two methods has not been investigated.

METHODS

A total of 90 BF samples were prospectively collected and analyzed using the Sysmex XN-20 BF model and microscopy. The extent of agreement between these two methods was evaluated using the Bland-Altman approach. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was employed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of high-fluorescence (HF) BF cells for malignant diseases.

RESULTS

The agreements of white blood cell (WBC), red blood cell (RBC), and percentages of neutrophils, lymphocytes, and monocytes between the Sysmex XN-20 BF model and manual microscopy were imperfect. The areas under the ROC curves for absolute and relative HF cells were 0.67 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.56-0.78) and 0.60 (95% CI: 0.48-0.72), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Due to the Sysmex XN-20 BF model's imperfect agreement with manual microscopy and its weak diagnostic accuracy for malignant diseases, the current evidence does not support replacing manual microscopy with this model in clinical practice.

Evaluation of Mindray BC-6800 body fluid mode for automated cerebrospinal fluid cell counting

Background:

Cellular analysis in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) provides important diagnostic information in various medical conditions. The aim of this study was to evaluate the application of Mindray BC-6800 body fluid (BF) mode in cytometric analysis of CSF compared to light microscopy (LM).

Methods:

One hundred and twenty-nine consecutive CSF samples were analyzed by BC-6800-BF mode as well as by LM. The study also included limits of blank (LoB), limit of detection (LoD), limit of quantitation (LoQ), carryover and linearity.

Results

White blood cells LoQ was 4.0×10

Conclusions:

BC-6800-BF offers rapid and accurate counts in clinically relevant concentration ranges, replacing LM for most samples. However, in samples with abnormal cell counts or with abnormal white blood cell differential scattergrams the need to microscopic review for a correct clinical outcome remains.

Automated Cerebrospinal Fluid Cell Counts Using the New Body Fluid Mode of Sysmex UF-1000i

BACKGROUND

We evaluated the new body fluid module on Sysmex UF1000-i (UF1000i-BF) for analysis of white blood cell (WBC) and red blood cell (RBC) in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF).

METHODS

WBC and RBC counting were compared between UF1000i-BF and Fuchs-Rosenthal counting chamber in 67 CSF samples. This study also included the evaluation of between-day precision, limit of blank (LoB), limit of detection (LoD), functional sensitivity (limit of quantitation, LoQ), carryover and linearity. Diagnostic agreement for differentiation between normal and increased WBC counts (≥5.0 × 10(6) /L) was also assessed.

RESULTS

The agreement between UF1000i-BF and manual WBC counts was otpiaml in all CSF samples (r = 0.99; y = 1.05x + 0.09). A modest overestimation was noticed in samples with WBC < 30 × 10(6) /L (r = 0.95; y = 1.21x - 0.15). A good agreement was observed for RBC counts (r = 0.98; y = 1.15x + 0.55), particularly in samples with RBC ≥ 18 × 10(6) /L (r = 0.98; y = 1.01x + 8.90). Between-day precision was good, with coefficient of variations (CVs) lower than 7.2% for both WBC and RBC. The LoBs were 0.1 × 10(6) WBC/L and 1.2 × 10(6) RBC/L, the LoDs were 0.7 × 10(6) WBC/L and 5.5 × 10(6) RBC/L, the LoQs were 2.4 × 10(6) WBC/L and 18.0 × 10(6) RBC/L, respectively. Linearity was excellent (r = 1.00 for both WBC and RBC). Carryover was negligible. Excellent diagnostic agreement was obtained at 4.5 × 10(6) WBC/L cut-off (sensitivity, 100%; specificity, 97.4%).

CONCLUSION

The UF1000i-BF provides rapid and accurate WBC and RBC counts in clinically relevant values of CSF cells. The use of UF1000i-BF may hence allow to replace routine optical counting, except for samples displaying abnormal WBC counts or abnormal scattergram distribution, for which differential cell counts may still be required.