Sysmex SE-9000 hematology analyzer: Performance evaluation on leukocyte differential counts using an NCCLS H20-A protocol

American Journal of Clinical Pathology

Volumn 108, Issue 6, 1997, Pages 674-686

  Buttarello, Mauro ^a   Bulian, Pietro ^a   Temporin, Valeria ^a   Rizzotti, Paolo ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL OF PADOVA   (Italy)

^b Ospedale Geriatrico   (Italy)

Author keywords

Hematology analyzer; Instrument evaluations; WBC differential

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BLOOD ANALYSIS; CELL MATURATION; CELL SUBPOPULATION; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; GRANULOCYTE; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; HUMAN TISSUE; LEUKOCYTE COUNT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REFERENCE VALUE;

EID: 0030707844     PISSN: 00029173     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/ajcp/108.6.674     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Buttarello M, Gadotti M, Lorenz C, et al. Evaluation of four automated hematology analyzers: a comparative study of differential counts (imprecision and inaccuracy). Am J Clin Pathol. 1992;97:345-352.
2. Bentley SA, Johnson TS, Sohier CH, Bishop CA. Flow-cytochemical differential leukocyte analysis with quantitation of neutrophil left shift: an evaluation of the Cobas-Helios analyzer. Am J Clin Pathol. 1994;102:223-230.
3. Goossens W, Van Hove L, Verwilghen RL. Monocyte counting: discrepancies in results obtained with different automated instruments. J Clin Pathol. 1991;44:224-227.
4. Terstappen LWMM, Johnson D, Mickaels RA, et al. Multidimensional flow cytometric blood cell differentiation without erythrocyte lysis. Blood Cells. 1991;17:585-602.
5. Lebeck LK, Mast BJ, Houwen B. Flow cytometric white blood cell differentials: a proposed alternate reference method. Sysmex J Int (Kobe). 1993;3:61-69.
6. Buttarello M, Lorenz C, Gadotti M, et al. Diagnostic performance: a comparative study of the leukocyte differential count on four automated haematology analyzers. Enr J Clin Chem Clin Biochem. 1993;31:251-258.
7. Brigden ML, Page NE, Graydon C. Evaluation of the Sysmex NE-8000. Automated hematology analyzer in a high-volume outpatient laboratory. Am J Clin Pathol. 1993;100:618-625.
8. Bentley SA, Johnson A, Bishop CA. A parallel evaluation of four automated hematology analyzers. Am J Clin Pathol. 1993;100:626-632.
9. Jones RG, Faust AM, Matthews RA. Quality team approach in evaluating three automated hematology analyzers with five-part differential capability. Am J Clin Pathol. 1995;103:159-166.
10. Hallawell R, O'Malley C, Hussein S, et al. An evaluation of the Sysmex NE-8000 hematology analyzer. Am J Clin Pathol. 1991;96:594-601.
11. Cornbleet PJ, Myrick D, Judkins S, Levy R. Evaluation of the Cell-Dyn 3000 differential. Am J Clin Pathol. 1992;98:603-614.
12. Al-Ismail SA, Bond K, Carter AB, et al. Two-centre evaluation of the Abbott CD 3500 blood counter. Clin Lab Haematol. 1995;17:11-21.
13. Lacombe F, Cazaux N, Briais A, et al. Evaluation of the leukocyte differential flags on an hematologic analyzer: the Cobas Argos 5 diff. Am J Clin Pathol 1995;104:495-502.
14. Cornbleet PJ, Thorpe G, Myrick D. Evaluation of instrument flagging of left shift using College of American Pathologists reference band identification criteria. Lab Hematol. 1995;1:97-104.
15. National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards. Reference Leukocyte Differential Count (Proportional) and Evaluation of Instrumental Methods. Wayne, Pa: NCCLS; 1992. NCCLS document H20-A.
16. International Council for Standardization in Haematology: Expert Panel on Cytometry. Recommendation of the International Council for Standardization in Haematology on reporting differential leucocyte counts. Clin Lab Haematol. 1995;17:113.
17. Rümke CL. Statistical reflections on findings atypical cells. Blood Cells. 1985;11:141-144.
18. Arkin CF, Medeiros JL, Pevzner LZ, et al. The white blood cell differential: evaluation of rapid impression scanning versus the routine manual count. Am J Clin Pathol. 1987;87:628-632.
19. Sadler WA, Smith MH. Use and abuse of imprecision profile: some pitfalls illustrated by computing and plotting confidence intervals. Clin Chem. 1990;36:1346-1350.
20. Rizzotti P, Buttarello M, Gadotti M, et al. Livelli decisionali nel conteggio leucocitario differenziale: il caso dei monociti. Prog Med Lab (Padova). 1991;5:368-369.
21. Hübl W, Andert S, Bayer PM. Evaluation of the Sysmex SE-9000 haematology analyser. Sysmex J Int (Kobe). 1995;5:85-95.
22. Hübl W, Tlustos L, Bayer PM. Use of precision profiles to evaluate precision of the automated leukocyte differential. Clin Chem. 1996;42:1068-1073.
23. Buttarello M, Cosio G, Gaspa U, et al. External quality assessment in hematology: complete blood count and leukocyte differential count with use of fresh blood. Eur J Lab Med (Verona). 1994;2:101-108.
24. Simson E, Groner W. The state of the art for the automated WBC differential, part I: analytic performance. Lab Hematol. 1995;1:13-22.
25. Fraser CG, Wilkinson SP, Neville RG, et al. Biologic variation of common hematologic laboratory quantities in the elderly. Am J Clin Pathol. 1989;92:465-470.
26. International Council for Standardization in Haematology: Expert Panel on Cytometry. Guidelines for the evaluation of blood cell analysers including those used for differential leucocyte and reticulocyte counting and cell marker applications. Clin Lab Haematol. 1994;16:157-174.
27. National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards. Reticulocyte Counting by Flow Cytometry: Proposed Guideline. Wayne, Pa: NCCLS; 1993. NCCLS document H44-P.
28. Houwen B, Chang L, Chen W, et al. Performance evaluation of the Sysmex SE-9000 hematology workstation. Sysmex J Int (Kobe). 1994;4:5-17.
29. Carter AB, Chavda N, Grant D, et al. Evaluation of the Sysmex SE-9000 automated hematology analyzer. Sysmex J Int (Kobe). 1995;5:6-16.
30. D'Onofrio G, Zini G, Tommasi M, Salutari P, Bizzi B. Evaluation of the hematology analyzer SE 9000 on a population with high prevalence of morphological abnormalities. Lab Hematol. 1995;1:76. Abstract.
31. Besson I, Jou IM, Villamor N, Gutiérrez MKG, Vives-Corrons JL. Differential leukocyte count (DLC) performance evaluation of the Sysmex SE-9000 hematology workstation. Lab Hematol. 1996;2:22-25.
32. Cornbleet PJ, Novak RW. Lack of reproducibility of band neutrophil identification despite the use of uniform identification criteria. Lab Hematol. 1995;1:89-96.
33. Mathy KA, Koepke JA. The clinical usefulness of segmented vs stab neutrophil criteria for differential leukocyte counts. Am J Clin Pathol. 1974;61:947-958.
34. Nelson L, Charache S, Wingfield S, Keyser E. Laboratory evaluation of differential white blood cell count information from the Coulter S-Plus IV and Technicon H1 in patient population requiring rapid 'turnaround' time. Am J Clin Pathol. 1989;91:563-569.
35. Banez EI, Bacaling JHD. An evaluation of the Technicon H1 automated hematology analyzer in detecting peripheral blood changes in acute inflammation. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1988;112:885-888.
36. Koepke JA, Dotson MA, Shifman MA. A critical evaluation of the manual/visual differential leukocyte counting method. Blood Cells. 1985;11:173-186.
37. Novak RW. The beleaguered band count. Clin Lab Med. 1993;13:895-903.
38. Dutcher TF. Leukocyte differentials: are they worth the effort? Clin Lab Med. 1984;4:71-87.
39. Bentley SA. Alternatives to the neutrophil band count. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1988;112:883-884.