Sheikh Mohd Anas, Biswas Amit Kumar, Baranwal Ajay Kumar, Kushwaha Neerja, Karade Santosh, Philip Joseph
Department of Immunohematology and Blood Transfusion, Armed Forces Medical College, Pune, Maharashtra, India.
Department of Immunohematology and Blood Transfusion, CH(CC), Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Asian J Transfus Sci. 2023 Jan-Jun;17(1):63-68. doi: 10.4103/ajts.AJTS_101_21. Epub 2022 Sep 28.
Assessment of residual white blood cell (rWBC) count is vital to ascertain the quality of leukodepleted (LD) blood components. Automated cell analyzers lack the sensitivity for the assessment of very few leukocytes as found in LD blood components. Flow Cytometry (FC) based methods and Nageotte hemocytometer are the most commonly used techniques for this purpose. The objective of this study was to compare the use of Nageotte hemocytometer and FC for quality control of LD red blood cell units.
A prospective, observational study was conducted in the Department of Immunohematology and Blood Transfusion of a tertiary care center from September 2018 to September 2020. About 303 LD-packed red blood cell units were tested by FC and Nageotte hemocytometer for rWBCs.
The number of rWBC (mean) detected by flow cytometer and Nageotte's hemocytometer was 1.06 ± 0.43 white blood cell (WBC)/μL and 0.67 ± 0.39 WBC/μL, respectively. Coefficient of variation was 58.37% by Nageotte hemocytometer method and 40.46% by FC. Linear regression analysis did not show any correlation (R= 0.098, = 0.001) whereas Pearson's correlation coefficient showed a weak relation (r = 0.31) between the two methods.
Flow cytometric technique provides a more precise and accurate objective tool compared to Nageotte hemocytometer which is labor intensive, time consuming, and prone to errors arising out of subjectivity along with reported underestimation bias. In the absence of adequate infrastructure, resources, and trained workforce, Nageotte hemocytometer method is a reliable alternative. Nageotte's chamber could be best used in the resource-constrained setup as it offers a relatively inexpensive, simple, and viable means to enumerate rWBCs.
评估残余白细胞(rWBC)计数对于确定白细胞去除(LD)血液成分的质量至关重要。自动细胞分析仪缺乏对LD血液成分中极少量白细胞进行评估的敏感性。基于流式细胞术(FC)的方法和纳盖奥特血细胞计数器是为此目的最常用的技术。本研究的目的是比较纳盖奥特血细胞计数器和FC在LD红细胞单位质量控制中的应用。
2018年9月至2020年9月在一家三级医疗中心的免疫血液学和输血科进行了一项前瞻性观察研究。通过FC和纳盖奥特血细胞计数器对约303个LD浓缩红细胞单位进行rWBC检测。
流式细胞仪和纳盖奥特血细胞计数器检测到的rWBC(平均值)数量分别为1.06±0.43个白细胞(WBC)/μL和0.67±0.39个WBC/μL。纳盖奥特血细胞计数器法的变异系数为58.37%,FC法为40.46%。线性回归分析未显示任何相关性(R = 0.098,P = 0.001),而皮尔逊相关系数显示两种方法之间存在弱相关性(r = 0.31)。
与纳盖奥特血细胞计数器相比,流式细胞术提供了一种更精确、准确的客观工具,纳盖奥特血细胞计数器劳动强度大、耗时,且容易因主观性产生误差,同时还存在报告的低估偏差。在缺乏足够基础设施、资源和训练有素的工作人员的情况下,纳盖奥特血细胞计数器法是一种可靠的替代方法。纳盖奥特计数板最适合用于资源有限的环境,因为它提供了一种相对廉价、简单且可行的数据rWBC的方法。