Performance Assessment of Sysmex DI-60: Is Digital Morphology Analyzer Reliable for White Blood Cell Differentials in Body Fluids?

BACKGROUND

Few studies have evaluated digital morphology (DM) analyzers on body fluids (BF). We evaluated the performance of a DM analyzer, Sysmex DI-60 (Sysmex, Kobe, Japan) for white blood cell (WBC) differentials in BF samples.

METHODS

In five BF samples (two pleural fluids and three ascites) containing a single, dominant cell type (>80%, neutrophils, lymphocytes, macrophages, abnormal lymphocytes, and malignant cells in each sample), we evaluated the precision of the DI-60 and compared the WBC differentials and turnaround times (TAT) between DI-60 and manual counting.

RESULTS

The precision of the DI-60 pre-classification and verification was excellent (%CV, 0.01-3.16%). After verification, the DI-60 showed high sensitivity, specificity, and efficiency (ranges: 90.8-98.1%, 96.8-97.9%, and 92.5-98.0%, respectively) for the dominant cell types in neutrophil- and lymphocyte-dominant samples. For all samples, the DI-60 and manual counting showed high correlations for major cell types (neutrophils, lymphocytes, macrophages, and others, r = 0.72 to 0.94) after verification. The agreement between the pre-classification and verification of the DI-60 was strong in the neutrophil-dominant sample (κ = 0.81). The DI-60 showed a significantly longer TAT (min: s) than manual counting for all samples (median TAT/slide: 6:28 vs. 1:53, < 0.0001), with remarkable differences in abnormal lymphocyte- and malignant cell-dominant samples (21:05 vs. 2:06; 12:34 vs. 2:25).

CONCLUSIONS

The DI-60 may provide reliable data in neutrophil- and lymphocyte-dominant BF samples. However, it may require longer times and higher workloads for WBC differentials especially in BF samples containing atypical cells. Further improvement would be needed before applying DM analyzers for routine clinical practice in BF analysis.