Performance of the new MC‐80 automated digital cell morphology analyser in detection of normal and abnormal blood cells: Comparison with the CellaVision DM9600

Abstract

IntroductionMindray MC‐80 is an automated system for digital imaging of white blood cells (WBCs) and their pre‐classification. The objective of this work is to analyse its performance comparing it with the CellaVision® DM9600.MethodsA total of 445 samples were used, 194 normal and 251 abnormal: acute leukaemia (100), myelodysplastic syndromes/myeloproliferative neoplasms (33), lymphoid neoplasms (50), plasma cell neoplasms (14), infections (49) and thrombocytopenia (5). WBC pre‐classification values with the MC‐80 and DM9600 were compared with (1) the microscope, (2) Mindray BC‐6800Plus differentials in only normal samples, and (3) confirmed or reclassified images (post‐classification). Pearson's correlation, Lin's concordance, Passing‐Bablok regression, and Bland–Altman plots were used. Sensitivity, specificity, positive (PPV) and negative (NPV) predictive values for abnormal cells using the MC‐80 were calculated.ResultsThe PPV and NPV were above 98% and 99%, for normal samples. For immature granulocytes (IG), NPV and PPV were 100% and 74.2%. When comparing the WBC differentials using the MC‐80, the microscope and the BC‐6800Plus, no differences were found except for basophils and IG. Our results showed good agreement between the pre‐ and post‐classification of normal WBC, including IG, quantified by high correlation and concordance values (0.91–1). Sensitivity and specificity for blasts were 0.984 and 0.640. The MC‐80 detected abnormal lymphocytes in 30% of the smears from patients with lymphoid neoplasm. Plasma cell identification was better using the DM9600. The sensitivity and specificity for erythroblast detection were 1 and 0.890.ConclusionWe found that the MC‐80 shows high performance for WBC differentials for both normal samples and patients with haematological diseases.

Performance comparison of two automated digital morphology analyzers for leukocyte differential in patients with malignant hematological diseases: Mindray MC‐80 and Sysmex DI‐60

“…Our study has several limitations. Firstly, in other comparative studies using different brands of DM analyzers, 14,15 was not an intentional omission, but rather a consequence of the lack of adult ALL cases in our institute. Additionally, only 100 PB smears were collected for performance evaluation, and the number of some abnormal cells, such as reactive lymphocytes, promyelocytes, and plasma cells, was relatively small.…”

“…10 As a DM analyzer launched in China, the MC-80 has exhibited excellent performance in leukocyte morphology analysis, as indicated by several independent studies. 11,12 There is a growing trend in comparing the performance of different brands of DM analyzers, such as CellaVision DC-1 versus Sysmex DI-60, 13 Mindray MC-80 versus Cel-laVision DM 9600, 14 and Mindray MC-100i versus Sysmex DI-60. 15 CellaVision has developed a series of automated morphological analysis systems, including the DM96, DM1200, and DM 9600.…”