RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Comparison between optical microscopy and automation for cytometric analysis of pericardial fluids in a cohort of adult subjects undergoing cardiac surgery
JF Journal of Clinical Pathology
JO J Clin Pathol
FD BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and Association of Clinical Pathologists
SP 493
OP 500
DO 10.1136/jclinpath-2019-205788
VO 72
IS 7
A1 Buoro, Sabrina
A1 Seghezzi, Michela
A1 Baigorria Vaca, Maria del Carmen
A1 Manenti, Barbara
A1 Moioli, Valentina
A1 Previtali, Giulia
A1 Simon, Caterina
A1 Cugola, Diego
A1 Brucato, Antonio
A1 Ottomano, Cosimo
A1 Lippi, Giuseppe
YR 2019
UL http://jcp.bmj.com/content/72/7/493.abstract
AB Aims Limited information is available on number and type of cells present in the pericardial fluid (PF). Current evidence and has been garnered with inaccurate application of guidelines for analysis of body fluids. This study was aimed at investigating the performance of automate cytometric analysis of PF in adult subjects.Methods Seventy-four consecutive PF samples were analysed with Sysmex XN with a module for body fluid analysis (XN-BF) and optical microscopy (OM). The study also encompassed the assessment of limit of blank, limit of detection and limit of quantitation (LoQ), imprecision, carryover and linearity of XN-BF module.Results XN-BF parameters were compared with OM for the following cell classes: total cells (TC), leucocytes (white blood cell [WBC]), polymorphonuclear (PMN) and mononuclear (MN) cells. The relative bias were −4.5%, 71.2%, 108.2% and −47.7%, respectively. Passing and Bablok regression yielded slope comprised between 0.06 for MN and 5.8 for PMN, and intercept between 0.7 for PMN and 220.3 for MN. LoQ was comprised between 3.8×106 and 6.0×106 cells/L for WBC and PMN. Linearity was acceptable and carryover negligible.Conclusions PF has a specific cellular composition. Overall, automated cell counting can only be suggested for total number of cells, whereas OM seems still the most reliable option for cell differentiation.