BackgroundHematology analyzers may ineffectively recognize abnormal cells, and manual differential counts may be imprecise for leukopenic samples. We evaluated the efficacy of the Hematoflow method for determining the leukocyte differential in leukopenic samples and compared this method with the manual differential method.MethodsWe selected 249 blood samples from 167 patients with leukopenia (WBC counts, 500-2,000/µL) for analysis in this study. The EDTA-anticoagulated blood samples were analyzed using an automatic blood cell counter (DxH800; Beckman Coulter, USA) and flow cytometry (FC 500; Beckman Coulter) by using Cytodiff reagent and analysis software (Beckman Coulter). Hematoflow results were selected or calculated from DxH800 and Cytodiff results. Two trained pathologists performed a manual differential count by counting 50-100 cells.ResultsThe precision of the Hematoflow method was superior to that of the manual method in counting 5 leukocyte subpopulations, immature granulocytes (IGs), and blasts. Blasts were detected in all 45 cases (100%) by Hematoflow. The correlation of the Cytodiff blast count to the reference count was high (r = 0.8325). For all other cell populations, the correlation of the Hematoflow results with the reference count was stronger than that of the other manual counts with the reference count.ConclusionsThe Hematoflow differential counting method is more reproducible and sensitive than manual counting, and is relatively easy to perform. In particular, this method detected leukemic blasts more sensitively than manual differential counts. The Hematoflow method is a very useful supplement to automated cell counting.
Background: Because of the long time required for conventional drug susceptibility test (DST) for rifampin and isoniazid, development of rapid DSTs is necessary. Recently, the AdvanSure™ MDR-TB GenoBlot Assay kit (LG Life Science, Korea), using reverse hybridization line blot assay, was developed. We compared this kit with Genotype ® MTBDRplus (HAIN Lifescience, Germany) and conventional DST. Methods: Of the DNAs preserved after performing DST by using Genotype ® , we selected 144 samples having conventional DST results. The experiments with both the kits were performed according to the manufacturers' instructions. For the samples for which discrepant results were obtained, sequencing was performed if the DNA was available. Conventional DST was performed at the Korean Institute of Tuberculosis by using the absolute concentration method. Results: For rifampin, the findings obtained using both the kits were the same with concordance rates of 98.6% (142/144) compared to conventional DST. Of the 2 discrepant findings, one was very major error and the other was major error. For isoniazid, compared to conventional DST, concordance rates of AdvanSure™ and Genotype ® were 95.8%(138/144) and 95.1%(137/144) respectively. Of the 6 discrepant findings between conventional method and Advansure™, 5 were very major error and one was major error. All the 7 discrepant findings between conventional method and Genotype ® were very major error. Conclusions: The findings obtained using AdvanSure™ showed high concordance with those obtained using Genotype ® and conventional DST. This kit has a higher rate of detection of isoniazid resistance because it includes probes for an additional target (ahpC).
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.