Samama M, Capelle C
Scand J Haematol Suppl. 1980;37:95-103. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0609.1980.tb01345.x.
In a previous work, we have compared two automated techniques for platelet-rich plasma using a thrombocounter or whole blood with the continuous flow instrument Auto-analyzer (AA). More recently, we have tested two instruments using whole blood: the first one, fully automated: Coulter S+; and the other one, semi-automated: Clay-Adams. In the present work, these 4 methods are compared to the phase contrast microscope technique, used as reference. The coefficients of variation ranged between 2 and 13 per cent. The coefficients of correlation between the different methods were between 0.92 and 0.96. Platelet distribution curves for platelet volumes obtained in parallel with platelet-rich plasma and with whole blood in 30 controls, show that platelet population are not significantly different. These instruments count particles and, therefore, necessitate a calibration made by means of platelet standards. Different platelet standards have been studied: these containing latex particles seem to give better results than suspensions of human or animal platelets.
在之前的一项工作中,我们使用血栓计数器或全血以及连续流动仪器自动分析仪(AA),比较了两种制备富血小板血浆的自动化技术。最近,我们测试了两种使用全血的仪器:第一种是全自动的库尔特S +;另一种是半自动的克莱 - 亚当斯。在本研究中,将这4种方法与用作参考的相差显微镜技术进行比较。变异系数在2%至13%之间。不同方法之间的相关系数在0.92至0.96之间。在30名对照中,与富血小板血浆和全血并行获得的血小板体积的血小板分布曲线表明,血小板群体没有显著差异。这些仪器计数颗粒,因此需要借助血小板标准品进行校准。已经研究了不同的血小板标准品:这些含有乳胶颗粒的标准品似乎比人或动物血小板悬液能给出更好的结果。