Development and Evaluation of a Novel In-Clinic Automated Hematology          Analyzer, ProCyte Dx, for Canine Erythrocyte Indices, Leukogram, Platelet Counts and          Reticulocyte Counts

Fujino, Yasuhito; Nakamura, Yoichi; Matsumoto, Hideaki; Fukushima, Kenjiro; Takahashi, Masashi; Ohno, Koichi; Tsujimoto, Hajime

doi:10.1292/jvms.13-0264

Cited by 12 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The samples were analyzed both with IDEXX ProCyte Dx automated hematology instrument (software version 00‐33_51) and Siemens Advia 2120 (software version 5.3.1.‐MS), both using settings for cats. Methods for the ProCyte and Advia have been reported previously . Both instruments are flow cytometers that use laser light scatter from cells in the sample and staining of cells to identify various cell types.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…ProCyte reports a 5‐part feline automated differential count (total neutrophils, lymphocytes, monocytes, eosinophils, and basophils). ProCyte uses a fluorescent polymethine stain, which binds to nucleic acids and cytoplasmic organelles in leukocytes . Side fluorescent light (SFL) reflects polymethine staining of leukocytes.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…ProCyte is a hematology instrument with advanced technology developed for veterinary use. Previous validation studies have concluded it has good to excellent performance with veterinary blood samples . ProCyte methods have been described previously .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous validation studies have concluded it has good to excellent performance with veterinary blood samples . ProCyte methods have been described previously . ProCyte uses similar to the same technology as the Sysmex XT200iV,b which also has been described …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[1][2][3] ProCyte methods have been described previously. [1][2][3][4] ProCyte uses similar to the same technology as the Sysmex XT200iV, b which also has been described. [5][6][7] The hypothesis of our study was that automated feline leukocyte differential count results reported by the Pro-Cyte Dx hematology system have severe errors of undetermined frequency.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Feline Differential Leukocyte Count with ProCyte Dx: Frequency and Severity of a Neutrophil‐Lymphocyte Error and How to Avoid It

Tvedten

Andersson

Lilliehöök

2017

Veterinary Internal Medicne

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundErroneous neutrophil and lymphocyte counts from analysis of feline blood samples were transferred directly into the hospital information system from the ProCyte Dx hematology instrument in our after‐hours laboratory. Errors usually were not detected by the users.Hypothesis/ObjectivesTo quantify the frequency and severity of errors associated with the ProCyte Dx analyzer and to identify methods to avoid the errors.AnimalsOne‐hundred six EDTA blood samples routinely submitted from feline hospital patients were analyzed.MethodsProCyte differential leukocyte counts were compared to 2 reference methods: Advia 2120 hematology instrument and manual enumeration. Limits for unacceptable deviation from the reference methods were defined as 18 for % lymphocytes and 23 for % neutrophils.ResultsFourteen of 106 samples had unacceptable errors for both lymphocytes and neutrophils compared to both reference methods. Median % lymphocytes in those 14 samples were 11.2, 15.0, and 53.0% for Advia, manual, and ProCyte, respectively. Median % neutrophils were 85.4, 81.5, and 34.2% for Advia, manual, and ProCyte, respectively. All errors were avoided by rejecting automated ProCyte differential leukocyte results whenever the dot plot appeared clearly incorrect, but only 9 of these 14 samples had a ProCyte WBC distribution error flag.Conclusions and Clinical ImportanceResults reported by ProCyte had markedly falsely increased lymphocyte and decreased neutrophil counts in 13% of feline patient samples. Users must reject automated differential leukocyte count results when the WBC dot plot appears overtly incorrect. Rejection based only on ProCyte WBC error flag was insufficient.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Feline Differential Leukocyte Count with ProCyte Dx: Frequency and Severity of a Neutrophil‐Lymphocyte Error and How to Avoid It

Tvedten

Andersson

Lilliehöök

2017

Veterinary Internal Medicne

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Pictorial guide to canine and feline blood smears. Part 2: abnormal findings – erythrocytes

Papasouliotis¹,

Murphy²

2021

In Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: A variety of disorders can cause morphological abnormalities of erythrocytes, most of which cannot be detected without a blood smear examination. Their accurate detection can lead to the diagnosis of specific diseases and the implementation of appropriate treatment.Aim of the article: This is the second of three articles about practical haematology and blood smear examination in cats and dogs. This article aims to increase the confidence of veterinary practitioners and nurses who examine blood smears in general practice in recognising common changes in the morphology of erythrocytes, and recalling the disorders most commonly responsible for these changes.

show abstract

Pre‐analytical and analytical variability of reticulocyte counts in dogs

Franchi

Giraldi²,

Bertazzolo³

et al. 2023

Veterinary Record

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Automated fluorescence-based haematology analysers are now available for reticulocyte enumeration in veterinary medicine, but manual counting is still largely used. This study aimed to evaluate potential sources of analytical and pre-analytical errors when performing automated and manual counts. Methods: Automated and two-operator double-blind manual reticulocyte counts were performed on 15 blood samples. The intra-assay variation of the automated and manual counts and the interoperator variation in the manual counts were then calculated. In addition, the effects of storage were evaluated using samples refrigerated at 4 • C or stored at room temperature for 2, 4, 12, 24, 48 or 72 hours after sampling. Results: Intra-assay coefficients of variation were lower for automated counts than for manual counts. Comparison between automated and mean total manual reticulocyte count showed no significant differences. In both refrigerated samples and those stored at room temperature, an increase in reticulocyte count was recorded only after 72 hours. Staining artefacts occurred only in one stored sample counted manually. Limitations: The presence of cytoplasmic particles other than RNA can cause misinterpretation of cells, leading to an erroneous reticulocyte count. Conclusion:The use of an automated analyser is preferable for reticulocyte enumeration in dogs. Common storage conditions seem to minimally affect reticulocyte evaluation; however, it is recommended to perform the analysis as soon as possible after sampling.

show abstract

Development and Evaluation of a Novel In-Clinic Automated Hematology Analyzer, ProCyte Dx, for Canine Erythrocyte Indices, Leukogram, Platelet Counts and Reticulocyte Counts

Cited by 12 publications

References 9 publications

Feline Differential Leukocyte Count with ProCyte Dx: Frequency and Severity of a Neutrophil‐Lymphocyte Error and How to Avoid It

Feline Differential Leukocyte Count with ProCyte Dx: Frequency and Severity of a Neutrophil‐Lymphocyte Error and How to Avoid It

Pictorial guide to canine and feline blood smears. Part 2: abnormal findings – erythrocytes

Pre‐analytical and analytical variability of reticulocyte counts in dogs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About