Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA.
Int J Lab Hematol. 2010 Feb;32(1 Pt 2):113-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1751-553X.2008.01113.x.
The complete blood count is often used as a screening tool to detect hematologic abnormalities in the peripheral blood. In patients with suspected or known leukemia, blast cells serve as an indicator of disease pathology. We compared the analytical performance of the Siemens ADVIA 2120 to the Beckman-Coulter LH750 in the detection of blasts. In the study, 390 blood samples were analyzed from a general hospital population, which included oncology patients. The presence of blasts, as indicated by the analyzers' flags, was compared with the results of a manual differential (regarded as the reference method). The ADVIA 2120 demonstrated 100% sensitivity at detecting blasts compared with 62% using the LH750. This improved sensitivity came at the expense of a lower specificity (49% vs. 86%). The effect of the false-positive and false-negative samples on the laboratory's manual review was partially (false-positive) or completely (false-negative) mitigated by triggering of other criteria. Detecting blasts in the peripheral blood depends on the performance characteristics of the hematology analyzer, in conjunction with the stringency of the laboratory's manual review criteria.
全血细胞计数常用于筛查外周血中的血液学异常。在疑似或已知患有白血病的患者中，原始细胞可作为疾病病理的指标。我们比较了西门子 ADVIA 2120 与贝克曼库尔特 LH750 在检测原始细胞方面的分析性能。在这项研究中，对来自综合医院人群（包括肿瘤患者）的 390 份血液样本进行了分析。通过分析器的标记来比较原始细胞的存在，与手动差异（视为参考方法）的结果进行比较。与 LH750 相比，ADVIA 2120 在检测原始细胞方面的灵敏度为 100%，而 LH750 的灵敏度为 62%。这种灵敏度的提高是以特异性降低为代价的（分别为 49%和 86%）。假阳性和假阴性样本对实验室手动复查的影响，部分（假阳性）或完全（假阴性）通过触发其他标准得到缓解。外周血中原始细胞的检测取决于血液学分析仪的性能特征，以及实验室手动复查标准的严格程度。
