ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The manual differential count has been recognized for its disadvantages, including large interobserver variability and labor intensiveness. In this light, automated digital cell morphology analyzers have been increasingly adopted in hematology laboratories for their robustness and convenience. This study aims to evaluate the white blood cell differential performance of the Mindray MC-80, the new automated digital cell morphology analyzer. METHODS: The cell identification performance of Mindray MC-80 was evaluated for sensitivity and specificity using pre-classification and post-classification of each cell class. The method comparison study used manual differentials as the gold standard for calculating Pearson correlation, Passing-Bablok regression, and Bland-Altman analysis. In addition, the precision study was performed and evaluated. RESULTS: The precision was within the acceptable limit for all cell classes. Overall, the specificity of cell identification was higher than 95% for all cell classes. The sensitivity was greater for 95% for most cell classes, except for myelocytes (94.9%), metamyelocytes (90.9%), reactive lymphocytes (89.7%), and plasma cells (60%). Pre-classification and post-classification results correlated well with the manual differential results for all the cell types investigated. The regression coefficients were greater than 0.9 for most cell classes except for promyelocytes, metamyelocytes, basophils, and reactive lymphocytes. CONCLUSION: The performance of Mindray MC-80 for white blood cell differentials is reliable and seems to be acceptable even in abnormal samples. However, the sensitivity is less than 95% for certain abnormal cell types, so the user should be aware of this limitation where such cells are suspected.
Subject(s)
Hematology , Leukocytes , Humans , Leukocyte Count , Reproducibility of Results , Blood Cell Count/methods , Hematology/methods , Plasma CellsABSTRACT
White blood cell differentials performance of a new automated digital cell morphology analyzer: Mindray MC-80, K. Paisooksantivatana; N. Khongjaroensakun; P. Chinudomwong; N. Chaothai; L. Chamchomdao; K. Suriyachand, International Journal of Laboratory Hematology, 10.1111/ijlh.13995 The above article, published online on 18 November 2022, in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com), had been retracted by agreement between the authors, the journal's Editors-in-Chief, Giuseppe D'Onofrio and Ian Mackie, and John Wiley & Sons. The authors contacted the journal after publication to propose extensive changes to the data presented in the accepted article such that it would no longer reflect the version that was peer reviewed. As a result, this retraction has been undertaken.
