Lim Yong Kwan, Kweon Oh Joo, Choi Jee-Hye, Lee Woonhyoung, Park Ae Ja
a Department of Laboratory Medicine , Chung-Ang University College of Medicine , Seoul , South Korea.
b Department of Laboratory Medicine , Kosin University College of Medicine , Busan , South Korea.
Scand J Clin Lab Invest. 2018 May;78(3):224-229. doi: 10.1080/00365513.2018.1437644. Epub 2018 Feb 19.
We estimated the measurement uncertainty (MU) of platelet concentration measured using the Sysmex XN system with two reference platelet counting methods described by DIN 58932-5 (PTB method) and the International Council for Standardization in Haematology (ICSH method). Ten blood samples were used to estimate and compare the MU of the XN system, and 30 samples were used to compare the methods. The standard uncertainty of the reference method was significantly higher for the ICSH method; the PTB method showed higher platelet concentrations than the ICSH method. When applying different methods with the XN system, optic counting showed higher MU compared to the other methods. There was good correlation among the two reference methods and three automated platelet-counting methods. We evaluated the MU in platelet concentrations measured using an automated hematology analyzer. Our results suggest that using the PTB method for calculating MU of the automated hematology analyzer is superior to the ICSH method because of its lower standard uncertainty.
我们使用德国标准化学会58932-5规定的两种参考血小板计数方法（德国物理技术研究院方法）和国际血液学标准化委员会方法，估算了使用Sysmex XN系统测量血小板浓度时的测量不确定度（MU）。使用10份血液样本估算并比较XN系统的MU，使用30份样本比较这些方法。国际血液学标准化委员会方法的参考方法标准不确定度显著更高；德国物理技术研究院方法显示的血小板浓度高于国际血液学标准化委员会方法。在XN系统应用不同方法时，光学计数法显示的MU高于其他方法。两种参考方法和三种自动血小板计数方法之间存在良好的相关性。我们评估了使用自动血液分析仪测量血小板浓度时的MU。我们的结果表明，由于德国物理技术研究院方法的标准不确定度较低，因此使用该方法计算自动血液分析仪的MU优于国际血液学标准化委员会方法。
