TY - JOUR
T1 - Valutazione multicentrica dei conteggi cellulari ottenuti con 8 analizzatori ematologici automatici
AU - Buoro, Sabrina
AU - Pipitone, Silvia
AU - Fanelli, Alessandra
AU - Francione, Sara
AU - Rin, Giorgio Da
AU - Di Fabio, Annamaria
AU - Fiorini, Fabiana
AU - Marini, Alessandra
AU - Papa, Angela
AU - Seghezzi, Michela
AU - Benegiamo, Anna
AU - Peruzzi, Benedetta
AU - Borin, Marco
AU - Siviero, Fosca
AU - Francioni, Lucia
AU - Lari, Tiziana
AU - Cocci, Franca
AU - Balboni, Fiamma
AU - Ciardelli, Maria Laura
AU - Dima, Francesco
AU - Germagnoli, Luca
AU - Gioia, Maria
AU - Gioia, Antonio La
PY - 2016/1/1
Y1 - 2016/1/1
N2 - The cellular analysis performed on hematology analyzers is based on the interaction of cells with electrical or optical signals. The heterogeneity of adopted methods and technologies by different analyzers can translate in a lack of homogeneity in analytical performance. This study compares 8 hematological analyzers vs. optical microscopy (OM) and, where possible, also compares the analyzers among each other. Correlations were assessed by Pearson's coefficient of correlation, Passing and Bablock regression and Bland-Altman bias plot analysis. The comparison among analyzers regarding leukocyte differential counts showed a good level of agreement, except for the basophil cell count. For this "critical population", the bias ranged from -5,8% (Cell-Dyn Sapphire vs. XN-9000) to 30,6% (Advia 2120i vs. XE- 2100). The comparison between automated differential leukocyte counts and OM showed also a good level of agreement, with a bias ranging from -0,9% to 8.9%. The bias for basophil cell count was however very high (79.5%).
AB - The cellular analysis performed on hematology analyzers is based on the interaction of cells with electrical or optical signals. The heterogeneity of adopted methods and technologies by different analyzers can translate in a lack of homogeneity in analytical performance. This study compares 8 hematological analyzers vs. optical microscopy (OM) and, where possible, also compares the analyzers among each other. Correlations were assessed by Pearson's coefficient of correlation, Passing and Bablock regression and Bland-Altman bias plot analysis. The comparison among analyzers regarding leukocyte differential counts showed a good level of agreement, except for the basophil cell count. For this "critical population", the bias ranged from -5,8% (Cell-Dyn Sapphire vs. XN-9000) to 30,6% (Advia 2120i vs. XE- 2100). The comparison between automated differential leukocyte counts and OM showed also a good level of agreement, with a bias ranging from -0,9% to 8.9%. The bias for basophil cell count was however very high (79.5%).
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84994589001&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84994589001&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.19186/BC-2016.029
DO - 10.19186/BC-2016.029
M3 - Articolo
AN - SCOPUS:84994589001
VL - 40
SP - 195
EP - 203
JO - Biochimica Clinica
JF - Biochimica Clinica
SN - 0393-0564
IS - 3
ER -