Performance evaluation of the Sysmex XS‐1000i automated haematology analyser

Abstract

The Sysmex XS-1000i is a compact new, fully automated haematology analyser, designed to generate complete blood counts with five-part leucocyte differential. In our study, a Sysmex XS-1000i instrument was evaluated according to Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) and International Council for Standardization in Haematology (ICSH) guidelines. Precision, carry-over and linearity were determined. Using a total of 700 patient samples, results from the Sysmex XS-1000i were compared with those from a Sysmex XE-2100, an Abbott Cell Dyn 4000 and the manual reference leucocyte differential. Using quality control material, total and within-run imprecision was less than 3% except for platelets. The system demonstrated good linearity over the entire reporting range and no carry-over (<0.5%). The Sysmex XS-1000i showed good correlation with XE-2100, CD-4000 and the manual reference leucocyte differential. Overall flagging sensitivity and specificity were 91% and 48%, respectively. In conclusion, the Sysmex XS-1000i demonstrated good analytical performance, is able to generate a complete blood count with five-part differential on low blood volumes and has considerable back-up capacity.

Performance Evaluation of Samsung LABGEOHC10 Hematology Analyzer

“…This study showed that the analyzer provides reliable and comparable results to instruments that are currently used in clinical laboratories. [9][10][11][12] Overall results of the repeatability and device/method precision satisfied the manufacturer's specifications, except for low PLT. The coefficient of variation at low PLT was slightly higher than the coefficient of variation claimed by the manufacturer, though it was still acceptable according to EP5-A2 specifications.…”

“…4 The imprecision of automated platelet counts in the thrombocytopenic range is a welldocumented problem. 11,[13][14][15] The LABGEO HC10 showed an overall good correlation with the LH780, except for MCHC. The poor correlation of MCHC has also been previously reported in the literature.…”

“…The poor correlation of MCHC has also been previously reported in the literature. 9,11,12,16 We determined if the LABGEO HC10 is a suitable replacement for the LH780, even though the 2 analyzers are very different in terms of their scale. The LABGEO HC10 showed an acceptable bias for most parameters investigated.…”

Initial performance evaluation of the UniCel® DxH 800 Coulter® cellular analysis system

“…The presence of interfering particles in automated blood cell enumeration often triggers a ‘flag’ for manual review. Although flags are helpful and results in film review, this flagging is often not sensitive enough (resulting in false negatives) or misidentifies other cellular types (resulting in false positives) (Brown et al , 2001; Chin-Yee et al , 2001, 2002; Keeney, Brown & Chin-Yee, 2001; Muller et al , 2006; Ghys, Malfait & J, 2009). Inaccurate automated enumeration of any parameter involves the traditional labor-intensive process of manually inspecting and assessing a peripheral blood film for each of these parameters.…”

Is there a difference between T- and B-lymphocyte morphology?

“…Modern commercial cell counters [8][9][10][11][12] have reached their limit of analytical potential in cell identification and have a weak performance in cell characterization, i.e., in determination of physical characteristics of cells. In particular, blood platelet volume and refractive index, red blood cell volume, and hemoglobin concentration are the only physical characteristics that can be measured reliably with automatic hematology analyzers.…”