Performance of automated digital cell imaging analyzer Sysmex DI-60

The Sysmex DI-60 system (DI-60, Sysmex, Kobe, Japan) is a new automated digital cell imaging analyzer. We explored the performance of DI-60 in comparison with Sysmex XN analyzer (XN, Sysmex) and manual count. In a total of 276 samples (176 abnormal and 100 normal samples), white blood cell (WBC) dif...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine 2017-11, Vol.56 (1), p.94-102
Hauptverfasser: Kim, Hyeong Nyeon, Hur, Mina, Kim, Hanah, Kim, Seung Wan, Moon, Hee-Won, Yun, Yeo-Min
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 102
container_issue 1
container_start_page 94
container_title Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine
container_volume 56
creator Kim, Hyeong Nyeon
Hur, Mina
Kim, Hanah
Kim, Seung Wan
Moon, Hee-Won
Yun, Yeo-Min
description The Sysmex DI-60 system (DI-60, Sysmex, Kobe, Japan) is a new automated digital cell imaging analyzer. We explored the performance of DI-60 in comparison with Sysmex XN analyzer (XN, Sysmex) and manual count. In a total of 276 samples (176 abnormal and 100 normal samples), white blood cell (WBC) differentials, red blood cell (RBC) classification and platelet (PLT) estimation by DI-60 were compared with the results by XN and/or manual count. RBC morphology between pre-classification and verification was compared according to the ICSH grading criteria. The manual count was performed according to the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute guidelines (H20-A2). The overall concordance between DI-60 and manual count for WBCs was 86.0%. The agreement between DI-60 pre-classification and verification was excellent (weighted κ=0.963) for WBC five-part differentials. The correlation with manual count was very strong for neutrophils (r=0.955), lymphocytes (r=0.871), immature granulocytes (r=0.820), and blasts (r=0.879). RBC grading showed notable differences between DI-60 and manual counting on the basis of the ICSH grading criteria. Platelet count by DI-60 highly correlated with that by XN (r=0.945). However, DI-60 underestimated platelet counts in samples with marked thrombocytosis. The performance of DI-60 for WBC differential, RBC classification, and platelet estimation seems to be acceptable even in abnormal samples with improvement after verification. DI-60 would help optimize the workflow in hematology laboratory with reduced manual workload.
doi_str_mv 10.1515/cclm-2017-0132
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1915881717</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1978464328</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-82d1a35cfc5c58c92be8b49ee8e3b0d4aded495ea33ad6ad0949702c8fe843163</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptkMtLw0AQhxdRbH1cPUrAi5fUnX1kN3iS-ioUFNRz2O5OSkrS1N0ErX-9ia0i4mnm8M1vZj5CToCOQIK8sLasYkZBxRQ42yFDEFzFgnPY_epFnCQMBuQghAWlIKVQ-2TAdKKYUnRIxo_o89pXZmkxqvPItE1dmQZd5Ip50ZgysliWUVGZebGcR2ZpyvUH-uhpHSp8j64ncUKPyF5uyoDH23pIXm5vnsf38fThbjK-msaWK9nEmjkwXNrcSiu1TdkM9UykiBr5jDphHDqRSjScG5cYR1ORKsqszlELDgk_JOeb3JWvX1sMTVYVoT_PLLFuQwYpSK1BgerQsz_oom59d3xPKS0SwZnuqNGGsr4OwWOerXz3qV9nQLNeb9brzXq9Wa-3GzjdxrazCt0P_u2zAy43wJspG_QO575dd82v9f8mywRSwT8B1bmIbg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1978464328</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Performance of automated digital cell imaging analyzer Sysmex DI-60</title><source>De Gruyter journals</source><creator>Kim, Hyeong Nyeon ; Hur, Mina ; Kim, Hanah ; Kim, Seung Wan ; Moon, Hee-Won ; Yun, Yeo-Min</creator><creatorcontrib>Kim, Hyeong Nyeon ; Hur, Mina ; Kim, Hanah ; Kim, Seung Wan ; Moon, Hee-Won ; Yun, Yeo-Min</creatorcontrib><description>The Sysmex DI-60 system (DI-60, Sysmex, Kobe, Japan) is a new automated digital cell imaging analyzer. We explored the performance of DI-60 in comparison with Sysmex XN analyzer (XN, Sysmex) and manual count. In a total of 276 samples (176 abnormal and 100 normal samples), white blood cell (WBC) differentials, red blood cell (RBC) classification and platelet (PLT) estimation by DI-60 were compared with the results by XN and/or manual count. RBC morphology between pre-classification and verification was compared according to the ICSH grading criteria. The manual count was performed according to the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute guidelines (H20-A2). The overall concordance between DI-60 and manual count for WBCs was 86.0%. The agreement between DI-60 pre-classification and verification was excellent (weighted κ=0.963) for WBC five-part differentials. The correlation with manual count was very strong for neutrophils (r=0.955), lymphocytes (r=0.871), immature granulocytes (r=0.820), and blasts (r=0.879). RBC grading showed notable differences between DI-60 and manual counting on the basis of the ICSH grading criteria. Platelet count by DI-60 highly correlated with that by XN (r=0.945). However, DI-60 underestimated platelet counts in samples with marked thrombocytosis. The performance of DI-60 for WBC differential, RBC classification, and platelet estimation seems to be acceptable even in abnormal samples with improvement after verification. DI-60 would help optimize the workflow in hematology laboratory with reduced manual workload.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1434-6621</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1437-4331</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1515/cclm-2017-0132</identifier><identifier>PMID: 28672770</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Germany: De Gruyter</publisher><subject>Automation ; Blood ; Blood platelets ; Classification ; comparison ; Counting ; Criteria ; Digital imaging ; Erythrocytes ; Evaluation ; Hematology ; Laboratories ; Leukocytes ; Leukocytes (granulocytic) ; Leukocytes (neutrophilic) ; Lymphocytes ; manual count ; Platelets ; Sysmex DI-60 ; Sysmex XN ; Thrombocytosis ; Workflow</subject><ispartof>Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine, 2017-11, Vol.56 (1), p.94-102</ispartof><rights>Copyright Walter De Gruyter &amp; Company 2017</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-82d1a35cfc5c58c92be8b49ee8e3b0d4aded495ea33ad6ad0949702c8fe843163</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-82d1a35cfc5c58c92be8b49ee8e3b0d4aded495ea33ad6ad0949702c8fe843163</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/cclm-2017-0132/pdf$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwalterdegruyter$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/cclm-2017-0132/html$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwalterdegruyter$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,27926,27927,66756,68540</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28672770$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kim, Hyeong Nyeon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hur, Mina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, Hanah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, Seung Wan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moon, Hee-Won</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yun, Yeo-Min</creatorcontrib><title>Performance of automated digital cell imaging analyzer Sysmex DI-60</title><title>Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine</title><addtitle>Clin Chem Lab Med</addtitle><description>The Sysmex DI-60 system (DI-60, Sysmex, Kobe, Japan) is a new automated digital cell imaging analyzer. We explored the performance of DI-60 in comparison with Sysmex XN analyzer (XN, Sysmex) and manual count. In a total of 276 samples (176 abnormal and 100 normal samples), white blood cell (WBC) differentials, red blood cell (RBC) classification and platelet (PLT) estimation by DI-60 were compared with the results by XN and/or manual count. RBC morphology between pre-classification and verification was compared according to the ICSH grading criteria. The manual count was performed according to the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute guidelines (H20-A2). The overall concordance between DI-60 and manual count for WBCs was 86.0%. The agreement between DI-60 pre-classification and verification was excellent (weighted κ=0.963) for WBC five-part differentials. The correlation with manual count was very strong for neutrophils (r=0.955), lymphocytes (r=0.871), immature granulocytes (r=0.820), and blasts (r=0.879). RBC grading showed notable differences between DI-60 and manual counting on the basis of the ICSH grading criteria. Platelet count by DI-60 highly correlated with that by XN (r=0.945). However, DI-60 underestimated platelet counts in samples with marked thrombocytosis. The performance of DI-60 for WBC differential, RBC classification, and platelet estimation seems to be acceptable even in abnormal samples with improvement after verification. DI-60 would help optimize the workflow in hematology laboratory with reduced manual workload.</description><subject>Automation</subject><subject>Blood</subject><subject>Blood platelets</subject><subject>Classification</subject><subject>comparison</subject><subject>Counting</subject><subject>Criteria</subject><subject>Digital imaging</subject><subject>Erythrocytes</subject><subject>Evaluation</subject><subject>Hematology</subject><subject>Laboratories</subject><subject>Leukocytes</subject><subject>Leukocytes (granulocytic)</subject><subject>Leukocytes (neutrophilic)</subject><subject>Lymphocytes</subject><subject>manual count</subject><subject>Platelets</subject><subject>Sysmex DI-60</subject><subject>Sysmex XN</subject><subject>Thrombocytosis</subject><subject>Workflow</subject><issn>1434-6621</issn><issn>1437-4331</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNptkMtLw0AQhxdRbH1cPUrAi5fUnX1kN3iS-ioUFNRz2O5OSkrS1N0ErX-9ia0i4mnm8M1vZj5CToCOQIK8sLasYkZBxRQ42yFDEFzFgnPY_epFnCQMBuQghAWlIKVQ-2TAdKKYUnRIxo_o89pXZmkxqvPItE1dmQZd5Ip50ZgysliWUVGZebGcR2ZpyvUH-uhpHSp8j64ncUKPyF5uyoDH23pIXm5vnsf38fThbjK-msaWK9nEmjkwXNrcSiu1TdkM9UykiBr5jDphHDqRSjScG5cYR1ORKsqszlELDgk_JOeb3JWvX1sMTVYVoT_PLLFuQwYpSK1BgerQsz_oom59d3xPKS0SwZnuqNGGsr4OwWOerXz3qV9nQLNeb9brzXq9Wa-3GzjdxrazCt0P_u2zAy43wJspG_QO575dd82v9f8mywRSwT8B1bmIbg</recordid><startdate>20171127</startdate><enddate>20171127</enddate><creator>Kim, Hyeong Nyeon</creator><creator>Hur, Mina</creator><creator>Kim, Hanah</creator><creator>Kim, Seung Wan</creator><creator>Moon, Hee-Won</creator><creator>Yun, Yeo-Min</creator><general>De Gruyter</general><general>Walter De Gruyter &amp; Company</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20171127</creationdate><title>Performance of automated digital cell imaging analyzer Sysmex DI-60</title><author>Kim, Hyeong Nyeon ; Hur, Mina ; Kim, Hanah ; Kim, Seung Wan ; Moon, Hee-Won ; Yun, Yeo-Min</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-82d1a35cfc5c58c92be8b49ee8e3b0d4aded495ea33ad6ad0949702c8fe843163</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Automation</topic><topic>Blood</topic><topic>Blood platelets</topic><topic>Classification</topic><topic>comparison</topic><topic>Counting</topic><topic>Criteria</topic><topic>Digital imaging</topic><topic>Erythrocytes</topic><topic>Evaluation</topic><topic>Hematology</topic><topic>Laboratories</topic><topic>Leukocytes</topic><topic>Leukocytes (granulocytic)</topic><topic>Leukocytes (neutrophilic)</topic><topic>Lymphocytes</topic><topic>manual count</topic><topic>Platelets</topic><topic>Sysmex DI-60</topic><topic>Sysmex XN</topic><topic>Thrombocytosis</topic><topic>Workflow</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kim, Hyeong Nyeon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hur, Mina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, Hanah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, Seung Wan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moon, Hee-Won</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yun, Yeo-Min</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kim, Hyeong Nyeon</au><au>Hur, Mina</au><au>Kim, Hanah</au><au>Kim, Seung Wan</au><au>Moon, Hee-Won</au><au>Yun, Yeo-Min</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Performance of automated digital cell imaging analyzer Sysmex DI-60</atitle><jtitle>Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine</jtitle><addtitle>Clin Chem Lab Med</addtitle><date>2017-11-27</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>56</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>94</spage><epage>102</epage><pages>94-102</pages><issn>1434-6621</issn><eissn>1437-4331</eissn><abstract>The Sysmex DI-60 system (DI-60, Sysmex, Kobe, Japan) is a new automated digital cell imaging analyzer. We explored the performance of DI-60 in comparison with Sysmex XN analyzer (XN, Sysmex) and manual count. In a total of 276 samples (176 abnormal and 100 normal samples), white blood cell (WBC) differentials, red blood cell (RBC) classification and platelet (PLT) estimation by DI-60 were compared with the results by XN and/or manual count. RBC morphology between pre-classification and verification was compared according to the ICSH grading criteria. The manual count was performed according to the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute guidelines (H20-A2). The overall concordance between DI-60 and manual count for WBCs was 86.0%. The agreement between DI-60 pre-classification and verification was excellent (weighted κ=0.963) for WBC five-part differentials. The correlation with manual count was very strong for neutrophils (r=0.955), lymphocytes (r=0.871), immature granulocytes (r=0.820), and blasts (r=0.879). RBC grading showed notable differences between DI-60 and manual counting on the basis of the ICSH grading criteria. Platelet count by DI-60 highly correlated with that by XN (r=0.945). However, DI-60 underestimated platelet counts in samples with marked thrombocytosis. The performance of DI-60 for WBC differential, RBC classification, and platelet estimation seems to be acceptable even in abnormal samples with improvement after verification. DI-60 would help optimize the workflow in hematology laboratory with reduced manual workload.</abstract><cop>Germany</cop><pub>De Gruyter</pub><pmid>28672770</pmid><doi>10.1515/cclm-2017-0132</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1434-6621
ispartof Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine, 2017-11, Vol.56 (1), p.94-102
issn 1434-6621
1437-4331
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1915881717
source De Gruyter journals
subjects Automation
Blood
Blood platelets
Classification
comparison
Counting
Criteria
Digital imaging
Erythrocytes
Evaluation
Hematology
Laboratories
Leukocytes
Leukocytes (granulocytic)
Leukocytes (neutrophilic)
Lymphocytes
manual count
Platelets
Sysmex DI-60
Sysmex XN
Thrombocytosis
Workflow
title Performance of automated digital cell imaging analyzer Sysmex DI-60
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-18T10%3A52%3A54IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Performance%20of%20automated%20digital%20cell%20imaging%20analyzer%20Sysmex%20DI-60&rft.jtitle=Clinical%20chemistry%20and%20laboratory%20medicine&rft.au=Kim,%20Hyeong%20Nyeon&rft.date=2017-11-27&rft.volume=56&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=94&rft.epage=102&rft.pages=94-102&rft.issn=1434-6621&rft.eissn=1437-4331&rft_id=info:doi/10.1515/cclm-2017-0132&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1978464328%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1978464328&rft_id=info:pmid/28672770&rfr_iscdi=true