Related Experiment Videos
A parallel evaluation of four automated hematology analyzers
S A Bentley1, A Johnson, C A Bishop
1Department of Pathology, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill.
American Journal of Clinical Pathology
|December 1, 1993
Summary
Four automated hematology analyzers were evaluated for complete blood count and differential leukocyte count (DLC). No single instrument was superior, but all were safe and effective for diagnostic use.
Area of Science:
- Clinical Laboratory Science
- Hematology Automation
Background:
- Automated hematology analyzers are crucial for complete blood count (CBC) and differential leukocyte count (DLC).
- Evaluating the performance of multiple analyzers is essential for clinical laboratory decision-making.
Purpose of the Study:
- To conduct a parallel evaluation of four automated hematology analyzers.
- To assess the complete blood count and differential leukocyte count parameters of these instruments.
Main Methods:
- Comparative analysis of four automated hematology analyzers: Celldyn 3000, Coulter STKS, Sysmex NE-8000, and Technicon H*2.
- Evaluation of complete blood count and differential leukocyte count (DLC) parameters.
- Adherence to the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Studies H20-A protocol for DLC evaluation.
Main Results:
- No single instrument demonstrated clear superiority over the others.
- All four instruments were deemed safe and effective for diagnostic purposes.
- Performance limitations were noted, particularly concerning the clinical utility of automated flags for identifying qualitative leukocyte abnormalities.
Conclusions:
- The evaluated hematology analyzers are suitable for diagnostic use, with no standout winner.
- Careful consideration of instrument performance is necessary for selecting the best option for specific clinical applications.
- Further investigation into the clinical usefulness of automated flags for leukocyte abnormalities is warranted.