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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine 2017-11, Vol.56 (1), p.94-102 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
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 & 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 & 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 |