Comparison of Automated Platelet Counts and Potential Effect on Transfusion Decisions in Cancer Patients

Abstract

Although optical and impedance methods were shown to be falsely increased in severely thrombocytopenic samples, further studies are needed to determine if more accurate methods would be clinically useful.

A novel method to estimate platelet counts from peripheral smears: A study comparing a new method of platelet estimation with existing methods.

“…Accurate measurement of the platelet counts is essential particularly in the management and monitoring of patients with thrombocytopenia [1,2,6] . Automated hematology analyzers in spite of the various advances have the limitation of inability to produce precise and reproducible platelet counts particularly in patients with thrombocytopenia [1,2,6,7] .…”

“…Automated hematology analyzers in spite of the various advances have the limitation of inability to produce precise and reproducible platelet counts particularly in patients with thrombocytopenia [1,2,6,7] . Presence of background debris, microorganisms, fragmented RBCs, apoptotic bodies from white blood cells and markedly microcytic RBCs can all hinder an accurate measurement of platelets in automated hematology analyzers by mimicking the platelets due to their small size.…”

“…But the accuracy of this method in predicting the platelet count in patients with thrombocytopenia is questionable [1,2] . Hence there is a need for an alternate method to perform the platelet counts with reasonable degree of accuracy in patients with thrombocytopenia.…”

Comparative evaluation of platelet counts in two hematology analyzers and potential effects on prophylactic platelet transfusion decisions

“…In view of the known methodologic challenges in patients with thrombocytopenia, we also investigated the potential impact of inaccuracy of these PLT methods at various transfusion trigger thresholds for prophylactic PLT transfusions. This subject has been studied previously, but not with the Sysmex XN analyzer . Since the use of this new analyzer is rapidly growing, we believe that it is of interest documenting the performance of this analyzer's three PLT technologies in this respect.…”

Evaluation of the risks of chemotherapy in dogs with thrombocytopenia

“…First, the correlation between automated and MPCs in an exclusively thrombocytopenic canine population has not been established. In one human study, comparing 403 samples with platelet counts of <50 000 µL −1 between four different analysers and a reference immunologic method found a positive bias, especially at less than <20 000 µL −1 between all methods . In our study, even though there was no significant difference between the automated haematology analyser and the MPCs ( P = 0.44) of the final cohort, nearly half (96/223, 43%) of the initial thrombocytopenic episodes (range 46 000–199 000 µL −1 , data not shown) identified with an automated haematology analyser were later excluded owing to an adequate number of platelets identified on manual smear review.…”