Electronic white blood cell (WBC) differential by standard cytology (hematology analyzer and visual inspection of blood smears) is limited to five types and identification of abnormal cells is only qualitative, often problematic, poorly reproducible, and labour costing. We present our results on WBC differential by flow cytometry (FCM) with a 6 markers, 5 colors CD36-FITC/CD2-PE1CRTH2-PE/CD19-ECD/CD16-Cy5/CD45-Cy7 combination, on 379 subjects, with detection of 12 different circulating cell types, among them 11 were quantified. Detection of quantitative abnormalities of whole leucocytes, neutrophils, eosinophils, basophils, monocytes, or lymphocytes was comparable by FCM and by standard cytology in terms of sensitivity and specificity. FCM was better than standard cytology in detection and quantification of circulating blast cells or immature granulocytes, with a first lineage orientation in the former case. All cases of lymphocytosis, with lineage assignment, were detected by FCM. FCM identified a group of patients with excess of CD16pos monocytes as those having an inflammatory syndrome. WBC differential by FCM is at least as reliable as by standard cytology. FCM superiority consists in identification and systematic quantification of parameters that cannot be assessed by standard cytology such as lineage orientation of blast cells or lymphocytes, and expression of markers of interest such as CD16 on inflammatory monocytes. ' International Society for Analytical CytologyKey terms white blood cell differential; flow cytometry; screening for hematological malignancies SCREENING for hematological disorders is routinely performed by counting circulating cells with hematology analyzers. But identification of circulating white blood cells (WBCs) by electronic counters is limited to only five cell-types: lymphocytes, monocytes, neutrophils, eosinophils, and basophils. Moreover, although most cell hematology analyzers are very good in detection of quantitative abnormalities, qualitative recognition of abnormal WBCs is poor, and microscopic examination of blood smears is needed for most cases to ascertain the presence of abnormal circulating cells. Therefore, both electronic WBC count and microscopic inspection of blood smears are needed to establish a reliable WBC differential. This traditional scheme, referred to as traditional or standard cytology, was set up in the 70s.Standard cytology is based on the expertise of cytologists and technicians, which is noticeably variable. Blood smear reviewing is time consuming and difficult to standardize. A recent study shows that, in a median institution among 263 hospitals and independent laboratories, manual review of peripheral blood smears were performed on 26.7% of specimens. The authors raised clearly the question of how to reduce the rate of manual peripheral blood smear review and to improve the efficiency of generating blood cell count results (1). In our institutions (JF, FL), <5% of reviewed blood smears will lead to further investigations. Last but not leas...

Together with increase of proliferation potential, the myelodysplastic syndromes are characterised by qualitative abnormalities of differentiation of myeloid precursors associated with increased intramedullary apoptosis, resulting in peripheral cytopenia.1 FAB and WHO classifications of these syndromes, widely used among hematologists, are relatively robust and simple, but omit immunophenotyping for diagnosis. Immunophenotypic abnormalities are frequent in myelodysplastic syndromes.2 Yet interpretation of flow cytometry remains complex, and often qualitative, being thus unable to give a black and white readout as molecular and cytogenetic techniques do. To simplify flow-

No abstract