Summary:The automated haematology analyser Sysmex NE-8000 was compared with the Technicon H-l, the automated analyser routinely used in our laboratory, and with manual cell differentiation results.One hundred and seventy samples from the daily routine workload, comprising specimens from healthy adults and patients with various ailments, were analysed on the Sysmex NE-8000 and the Technicon H-l. A manual-400 leukocyte differential count was performed on each specimen. Comparison of the results from the two blood cell counters showed good correlation (r > 0.9) for the white blood cell count, haemoglobin, haematocrit and platelet count. For the red blood cell count and mean cellular volume, the correlation coefficients were greater than 0.8. In the leukocyte differential count, Sysmex NE-8000 and Technicon H-l showed good correlations for the neutrophil (r = 0.953), lymphocyte (r = 0.763), and eosinophil counts (r = 0.904). Correlation coefficients were very low for monocyte (r = 0.130) and basophil counts (r = 0.006). Correlation l between the manual-400 method and the electronic leukocyte differential count showed similar results. \Two hundred and twenty six normal and abnormal samples were compared with respect to morphology " flagging with the two analysers, using the manual differentiation äs the reference method. The abnormal specimens were representative of the ränge of leukoeyte abnormalities seen in our laboratory. Sensitivity for detecting blasts was equal for both analysers. Sysmex NE-8000 was much more sensitive for detecting immature granulocytes than Technicon H-l. Low ranges of atypical lymphocytes were missed by Sysmex NE-8000. Left shift was also frequently missed.During the evaluation period, Sysmex NE-8000 was very easy to handle and no Instrument malfunctions were met. The Sysmex NE-8000 is well suited for routine blood cell analysis and is a valuable tool for the diagnosis and screening of varioiis häematological abnormalities.
samples collected by Salivette ® (common for cortisol) are not significantly different from values in passive drool samples, indicating that the Salivette does not influence salivary transferrin values.We speculate that endogenous peroxidase in saliva has the potential to cause false-positive (high) readings with methods that base their detection on this chemical reaction. A large component of the variance in the values determined with the Hemastix method with saliva may be measurement error.We also found that mild to moderate injury to the oral mucosa rapidly (within minutes) increased visual inspection ratings of saliva discoloration, Hemastix values, and transferrin concentrations (7 ). Within 15 min of micro injury, sample discoloration ratings returned to baseline values. By contrast, salivary transferrin and Hemastix scores remained increased over baseline for 30 min. These findings underscore that blood components can be present in saliva even in the absence of visual evidence of blood contamination. The amount of blood contamination in response to this mild to moderate injury did not change either DHEA or cortisol, but increased salivary testosterone in samples not visibly contaminated.Measured testosterone was increased when transferrin was Ն5 mg/L, and measured DHEA and cortisol were increased at transferrin Ͼ10 mg/L. Our findings suggest that an additional amount of care may need to be taken to ensure that salivary immunoassay results are accurate. The presence of blood components in saliva can be invisible to the eye and has potential to distort the true values of salivary analytes. There are distinct problems and pitfalls associated with measurement strategies used in the literature to screen and quantify blood contamination in saliva that limit their usefulness. Screening procedures may need to be used in the laboratory to rule out contamination of saliva with blood. We anticipate that awareness of these issues may help investigators and testing laboratories improve or expand the accuracy of salivary measurement.We appreciate the technical, conceptual, and analytical assistance provided
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.