Wituska Małgorzata, Ciepiela Olga
Laboratory of Central Teaching Hospital, University Clinical Center of Medical University of Warsaw, 02-091 Warsaw, Poland.
Department of Laboratory Medicine, Medical University of Warsaw, 02-091 Warsaw, Poland.
J Clin Med. 2025 Jul 31;14(15):5401. doi: 10.3390/jcm14155401.
Reliable platelet (PLT) measurement is crucial for the accurate diagnosis of thrombocytopenia. Several methods exist for automated PLT counting, including the impedance method (PLT-I), as well as optical and fluorescence methods (PLT-F). The impedance method is cost-effective but susceptible to interference from small red blood cells and schistocytes. In contrast, fluorescent assessment offers higher specificity but is more expensive, as it requires additional dyes and detectors. Hybrid platelet counting (PLT-H) combines impedance with measurements from the leukocyte differentiation channel and is available without additional cost. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of hybrid PLT counting in anemic samples. In this retrospective study, PLT counts from 583 unselected anemic samples were analyzed using two different analyzers: the Sysmex XN3500, equipped with fluorescent PLT-F technology, and the Mindray BC6200, which uses both impedance (PLT-I) and hybrid (PLT-H) technologies. Agreement between PLT-I and PLT-F, as well as between PLT-H and PLT-F, was assessed using Bland-Altman plots. Correlation between the methods was evaluated using the Pearson correlation coefficient. The hybrid method demonstrated better accuracy in PLT counting compared to the impedance method. Correlation between PLT-H and PLT-F was excellent, ranging from 0.991 to 0.999. In thrombocytopenic samples (PLT < 50 G/L), the hybrid method also provided more reliable PLT counts than the impedance method, reducing the number of falsely elevated PLT results by nearly fivefold. Hybrid platelet counting yields more accurate results than the impedance method in anemic samples and shows excellent correlation with the fluorescence method.
可靠的血小板(PLT)测量对于血小板减少症的准确诊断至关重要。存在多种自动血小板计数方法,包括阻抗法(PLT-I)以及光学和荧光法(PLT-F)。阻抗法具有成本效益,但易受小红细胞和裂红细胞的干扰。相比之下,荧光评估具有更高的特异性,但成本更高,因为它需要额外的染料和检测器。混合血小板计数(PLT-H)将阻抗与白细胞分化通道的测量相结合,且无需额外费用即可使用。本研究的目的是评估混合血小板计数在贫血样本中的准确性。在这项回顾性研究中,使用两种不同的分析仪对583份未经筛选的贫血样本的血小板计数进行了分析:配备荧光PLT-F技术的Sysmex XN3500,以及使用阻抗(PLT-I)和混合(PLT-H)技术的迈瑞BC6200。使用Bland-Altman图评估PLT-I与PLT-F之间以及PLT-H与PLT-F之间的一致性。使用Pearson相关系数评估方法之间的相关性。与阻抗法相比,混合法在血小板计数方面显示出更高的准确性。PLT-H与PLT-F之间的相关性极佳,范围为0.991至0.999。在血小板减少样本(PLT < 50 G/L)中,混合法也比阻抗法提供了更可靠的血小板计数,将错误升高的血小板结果数量减少了近五倍。在贫血样本中,混合血小板计数比阻抗法产生更准确的结果,并且与荧光法显示出极佳的相关性。