Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Analytical validation of white blood cell differential and platelet assessment on the Sysmex DI-60 digital morphology analyzer.

INTRODUCTION: Digital morphology analyzers are increasingly replacing light microscopy in laboratory hematology practice. This study aimed to perform the analytical validation of the white blood cell (WBC) differential and of reliability of platelet assessment on Sysmex DI-60 (Kobe, Japan).

METHODS: Validation included determination of within-run and between-run precision for WBC differential according to the CLSI EP15-A3 protocol, accuracy and method comparison with light microscopy and with the automated WBC differential from the Sysmex XN-10 hematology analyzer, reliability of platelet clump detection and platelet count estimation.

RESULTS: Standard deviations of both pre- and post-classification mostly satisfied manufacturer's criteria for imprecision. Accuracy assessment revealed that only eosinophil count (1.4%) in one peripheral blood smear (PBS) remained outside the declared range (2-10%) after reclassification. Method comparison between DI-60 and light microscopy yielded Spearman's correlation coefficients from 0.37 (basophils) to 0.94 (neutrophils and lymphocytes), minor proportional difference for bands, constant difference for monocytes, both constant and proportional difference for lymphocytes and statistically significant biases for bands, lymphocytes, monocytes and basophils. Diagnostic sensitivity (Se) and specificity (Sp) of DI-60 in detecting immature/pathological cells were 88.7% (95%CI:81.1-94.0) and 83.0% (95%CI:78.7-86.7), respectively, with the area under the curve (AUC) of 0.86 (95%CI:0.82-0.89). Agreement in detection of platelet clumps was 94.8% (kappa coefficient = 0.67, 95%CI:0.53-0.80). Se and Sp of DI-60 to detect platelet clumps were 65.7% (95%CI: 47.8-80.9) and 96.9% (95%CI: 93.9-98.6), respectively, while AUC was 0.81 (95%CI: 0.76-0.86).

CONCLUSION: DI-60 provides reliable WBC differential and platelet assessment. In doubtful cases, the use of light microscopy is still mandatory.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app