Clinical performance evaluation of the new hematology analyzer Mindray BC‐6000

Abstract

Introduction With the progression of blood analysis technology, hematology analyzers become more complex and diverse. How to choose a superb instrument is a challenge for the laboratories. In the essay, we studied whether the newest BC‐6000 hematology analyzer meets the needs of a clinical hematology laboratory. Methods Methods comparison was performed using 350 blood samples from patients between different measurement procedures; the basic analytical performance was also tested, including the throughput, carryover, precision, and linearity in different modes. The flagging performances for blasts, immature granulocytes, and NRBC were compared with manual microscopy. Results There were minimal carryover (<0.30%) and excellent actual blood linearity for all routinely used parameters concerned by the clinicians (R2 ≥ 0.997). Repeatability and reproducibility were satisfactory at all testing levels. The functional sensitivity of leukocytes and platelets in the blood and leukocytes and erythrocytes in body fluid was excellent at the 20% CV level. BC‐6000 and XN displayed very high correlations for complete blood count (CBC) parameters and very high consistency for leukocyte differentials and NRBC compared with manual microscopy. BC‐6000 showed excellent sensitivity and specificity flagging ability on blasts (82.9% and 82.4%) and NRBC (80.0% and 96.9%). For immature granulocytes, BC‐6000 showed excellent sensitivity but common specificity flagging ability (91.7% and 65.6%). Conclusion The clinical performance of BC‐6000 is excellent, and the analyzer can provide timely and accurate reporting for most of the small‐ to large‐scale laboratories.

Evaluation and comparison of the new Mindray BC‐6200 hematology analyzer with ADVIA 2120i

“…The results of sensitivity, specificity, and IG flagging efficiency for the BC‐6200 were 94.4%, 75.5%, and 80.4%, respectively. Similar results were presented by Shen et al in their work obtained for the Mindray BC‐6000 22 . They showed that it has a high sensitivity (91.7%), but low specificity (65.6%) and overall efficiency of 74.9%.…”

A retrospective study of age‐defined hematologic inflammatory markers related to pediatric COVID‐19 diagnosis

“…All the CBC counts and differentials showed satisfactory analytical performance, and the repeatability results for eosinophils were between 3.99 and 5.94%. 17 …”

“…The hematologic inflammatory markers were calculated as follows: Neutrophil‐to‐lymphocyte ratio ( NLR; neutrophil count/lymphocyte count), derived neutrophil‐to‐lymphocyte ratio (dNLR; neutrophil count/(white blood cell count– neutrophil count)), monocyte‐to‐lymphocyte ratio (MLR; monocyte count/lymphocyte count), platelet‐to‐lymphocyte ratio (PLR; platelet count/lymphocyte count), aggregate index of systemic inflammation (AISI; (neutrophil count × platelet count × monocyte count)/lymphocyte count), neutrophil‐to‐lymphocyte platelet ratio (NLPR; neutrophil count/(lymphocyte count × platelet count)), systemic immune‐inflammation index (SII; (neutrophil count × platelet count)/lymphocyte count), systemic inflammation response index (SIRI; (neutrophil count × monocyte count)/lymphocyte count), and eosinophil‐to‐monocyte ratio (EMR; eosinophil count/monocyte count). 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 The analysis of subgroup hematological values was performed according to the children's age cutoffs.…”

“…All the CBC counts and differentials showed satisfactory analytical performance, and the repeatability results for eosinophils were between 3.99 and 5.94%. 17 The hematologic inflammatory markers were calculated as follows: Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR; neutrophil count/ lymphocyte count), derived neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (dNLR; neutrophil count/(white blood cell count-neutrophil count)), monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR; monocyte count/lymphocyte count), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR; platelet count/lymphocyte count), aggregate index of systemic inflammation (AISI;…”

“…(neutrophil count × platelet count × monocyte count)/lymphocyte count), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte platelet ratio (NLPR; neutrophil count/(lymphocyte count × platelet count)), systemic immuneinflammation index (SII; (neutrophil count × platelet count)/lymphocyte count), systemic inflammation response index (SIRI; (neutrophil count × monocyte count)/lymphocyte count), and eosinophil-tomonocyte ratio (EMR; eosinophil count/monocyte count). [14][15][16][17][18][19][20] The analysis of subgroup hematological values was performed according to the children's age cutoffs.…”