Evaluation of the monocyte counting by two automated haematology analysers compared with flow cytometry
Summary The aim is to determine the monocyte count performance of the Bayer Diagnostics ADVIA®120 and Coulter® LH 750 automated haematology analysers and the results obtained by these two instruments were compared with those provided by Becton Dickinson FACScan flow cytometer using the combination o...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Clinical and laboratory haematology 2005-04, Vol.27 (2), p.91-97 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 97 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 2 |
| container_start_page | 91 |
| container_title | Clinical and laboratory haematology |
| container_volume | 27 |
| creator | GRIMALDI, E. CARANDENTE, P. SCOPACASA, F. ROMANO, M. F. PELLEGRINO, M. BISOGNI, R. DE CATERINA, M. |
| description | Summary
The aim is to determine the monocyte count performance of the Bayer Diagnostics ADVIA®120 and Coulter® LH 750 automated haematology analysers and the results obtained by these two instruments were compared with those provided by Becton Dickinson FACScan flow cytometer using the combination of CD45/CD14 MoAb. Linearity and imprecision were also evaluated. The linearity of both instruments was good. Coulter® LH 750 showed better precision (4.3%) than ADVIA 120 (9.0%) both within and between batch. A significant correlation (r = 0.973) was found between the LH 750 and the flow cytometry method, while a modest one was observed between the latter and the ADVIA 120 (r = 0.880). When comparing the percentage of monocytes by means of one‐way anova and Tukey test, it was found that the LH 750 provided the closest results in comparison with flow cytometry, with no statistical difference between the means (mean difference MO% = 0.6); however the difference was statistically different between the ADVIA 120 and flow cytometry (mean difference MO% = −4.06). These data were confirmed by Altman–Bland and Deming regression analyses. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1111/j.1365-2257.2005.00676.x |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67539931</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>67539931</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4056-441f388846b0a0ef7650c759758148a3f471d2148b903856ef0d378baeaa10703</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkEGP0zAQhS0EYsvCX0A-cUsYx3bsHDig1W53oQIhgfZoOemkTUniYju0-fe4tFquzGWeNO89Wx8hlEHO0rzf5YyXMisKqfICQOYApSrz4zOyeDo8JwtggmWVluKKvAphB8A4U-oluWJSacEKviCb29-2n2zs3EhdS-MW6eBG18wRaeOmMXbjhtYzjQdH7RTdYCOu6dZiEq53m5na0fZzQB-Sf9hbn86HLm5p27sDTT1uwOjn1-RFa_uAby77mvy4u_1-c5-tvi4fbj6uskaALDMhWMu11qKswQK2qpTQKFkpqZnQlrdCsXWRZF0B17LEFtZc6dqitQwU8Gvy7ty79-7XhCGaoQsN9r0d0U3BlEryquIsGfXZ2HgXgsfW7H03WD8bBuYE2ezMiaU5sTQnyOYvZHNM0beXN6Z6wPW_4IVqMnw4Gw5dj_N_F5uHT6v7pFI-O-e7EPH4lLf-Z_o_V9I8flkafbd8lGz1zXzmfwBIVJsa</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>67539931</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Evaluation of the monocyte counting by two automated haematology analysers compared with flow cytometry</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>GRIMALDI, E. ; CARANDENTE, P. ; SCOPACASA, F. ; ROMANO, M. F. ; PELLEGRINO, M. ; BISOGNI, R. ; DE CATERINA, M.</creator><creatorcontrib>GRIMALDI, E. ; CARANDENTE, P. ; SCOPACASA, F. ; ROMANO, M. F. ; PELLEGRINO, M. ; BISOGNI, R. ; DE CATERINA, M.</creatorcontrib><description>Summary
The aim is to determine the monocyte count performance of the Bayer Diagnostics ADVIA®120 and Coulter® LH 750 automated haematology analysers and the results obtained by these two instruments were compared with those provided by Becton Dickinson FACScan flow cytometer using the combination of CD45/CD14 MoAb. Linearity and imprecision were also evaluated. The linearity of both instruments was good. Coulter® LH 750 showed better precision (4.3%) than ADVIA 120 (9.0%) both within and between batch. A significant correlation (r = 0.973) was found between the LH 750 and the flow cytometry method, while a modest one was observed between the latter and the ADVIA 120 (r = 0.880). When comparing the percentage of monocytes by means of one‐way anova and Tukey test, it was found that the LH 750 provided the closest results in comparison with flow cytometry, with no statistical difference between the means (mean difference MO% = 0.6); however the difference was statistically different between the ADVIA 120 and flow cytometry (mean difference MO% = −4.06). These data were confirmed by Altman–Bland and Deming regression analyses.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0141-9854</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1365-2257</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2257.2005.00676.x</identifier><identifier>PMID: 15784123</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford, UK: Blackwell Science Ltd</publisher><subject>Automation ; Bayer ADVIA 120 ; Becton Dickinson FACScan ; Blood Cells - cytology ; Coulter LH 750 ; Flow Cytometry ; Hematologic Tests - instrumentation ; Hematologic Tests - standards ; Humans ; Leukocyte Count - instrumentation ; monocyte count ; Monocytes - cytology ; Reproducibility of Results</subject><ispartof>Clinical and laboratory haematology, 2005-04, Vol.27 (2), p.91-97</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4056-441f388846b0a0ef7650c759758148a3f471d2148b903856ef0d378baeaa10703</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4056-441f388846b0a0ef7650c759758148a3f471d2148b903856ef0d378baeaa10703</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fj.1365-2257.2005.00676.x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fj.1365-2257.2005.00676.x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,778,782,1414,27907,27908,45557,45558</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15784123$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>GRIMALDI, E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>CARANDENTE, P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SCOPACASA, F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>ROMANO, M. F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>PELLEGRINO, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BISOGNI, R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DE CATERINA, M.</creatorcontrib><title>Evaluation of the monocyte counting by two automated haematology analysers compared with flow cytometry</title><title>Clinical and laboratory haematology</title><addtitle>Clin Lab Haematol</addtitle><description>Summary
The aim is to determine the monocyte count performance of the Bayer Diagnostics ADVIA®120 and Coulter® LH 750 automated haematology analysers and the results obtained by these two instruments were compared with those provided by Becton Dickinson FACScan flow cytometer using the combination of CD45/CD14 MoAb. Linearity and imprecision were also evaluated. The linearity of both instruments was good. Coulter® LH 750 showed better precision (4.3%) than ADVIA 120 (9.0%) both within and between batch. A significant correlation (r = 0.973) was found between the LH 750 and the flow cytometry method, while a modest one was observed between the latter and the ADVIA 120 (r = 0.880). When comparing the percentage of monocytes by means of one‐way anova and Tukey test, it was found that the LH 750 provided the closest results in comparison with flow cytometry, with no statistical difference between the means (mean difference MO% = 0.6); however the difference was statistically different between the ADVIA 120 and flow cytometry (mean difference MO% = −4.06). These data were confirmed by Altman–Bland and Deming regression analyses.</description><subject>Automation</subject><subject>Bayer ADVIA 120</subject><subject>Becton Dickinson FACScan</subject><subject>Blood Cells - cytology</subject><subject>Coulter LH 750</subject><subject>Flow Cytometry</subject><subject>Hematologic Tests - instrumentation</subject><subject>Hematologic Tests - standards</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Leukocyte Count - instrumentation</subject><subject>monocyte count</subject><subject>Monocytes - cytology</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><issn>0141-9854</issn><issn>1365-2257</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2005</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkEGP0zAQhS0EYsvCX0A-cUsYx3bsHDig1W53oQIhgfZoOemkTUniYju0-fe4tFquzGWeNO89Wx8hlEHO0rzf5YyXMisKqfICQOYApSrz4zOyeDo8JwtggmWVluKKvAphB8A4U-oluWJSacEKviCb29-2n2zs3EhdS-MW6eBG18wRaeOmMXbjhtYzjQdH7RTdYCOu6dZiEq53m5na0fZzQB-Sf9hbn86HLm5p27sDTT1uwOjn1-RFa_uAby77mvy4u_1-c5-tvi4fbj6uskaALDMhWMu11qKswQK2qpTQKFkpqZnQlrdCsXWRZF0B17LEFtZc6dqitQwU8Gvy7ty79-7XhCGaoQsN9r0d0U3BlEryquIsGfXZ2HgXgsfW7H03WD8bBuYE2ezMiaU5sTQnyOYvZHNM0beXN6Z6wPW_4IVqMnw4Gw5dj_N_F5uHT6v7pFI-O-e7EPH4lLf-Z_o_V9I8flkafbd8lGz1zXzmfwBIVJsa</recordid><startdate>200504</startdate><enddate>200504</enddate><creator>GRIMALDI, E.</creator><creator>CARANDENTE, P.</creator><creator>SCOPACASA, F.</creator><creator>ROMANO, M. F.</creator><creator>PELLEGRINO, M.</creator><creator>BISOGNI, R.</creator><creator>DE CATERINA, M.</creator><general>Blackwell Science Ltd</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200504</creationdate><title>Evaluation of the monocyte counting by two automated haematology analysers compared with flow cytometry</title><author>GRIMALDI, E. ; CARANDENTE, P. ; SCOPACASA, F. ; ROMANO, M. F. ; PELLEGRINO, M. ; BISOGNI, R. ; DE CATERINA, M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4056-441f388846b0a0ef7650c759758148a3f471d2148b903856ef0d378baeaa10703</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2005</creationdate><topic>Automation</topic><topic>Bayer ADVIA 120</topic><topic>Becton Dickinson FACScan</topic><topic>Blood Cells - cytology</topic><topic>Coulter LH 750</topic><topic>Flow Cytometry</topic><topic>Hematologic Tests - instrumentation</topic><topic>Hematologic Tests - standards</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Leukocyte Count - instrumentation</topic><topic>monocyte count</topic><topic>Monocytes - cytology</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>GRIMALDI, E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>CARANDENTE, P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SCOPACASA, F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>ROMANO, M. F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>PELLEGRINO, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BISOGNI, R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DE CATERINA, M.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Clinical and laboratory haematology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>GRIMALDI, E.</au><au>CARANDENTE, P.</au><au>SCOPACASA, F.</au><au>ROMANO, M. F.</au><au>PELLEGRINO, M.</au><au>BISOGNI, R.</au><au>DE CATERINA, M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Evaluation of the monocyte counting by two automated haematology analysers compared with flow cytometry</atitle><jtitle>Clinical and laboratory haematology</jtitle><addtitle>Clin Lab Haematol</addtitle><date>2005-04</date><risdate>2005</risdate><volume>27</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>91</spage><epage>97</epage><pages>91-97</pages><issn>0141-9854</issn><eissn>1365-2257</eissn><abstract>Summary
The aim is to determine the monocyte count performance of the Bayer Diagnostics ADVIA®120 and Coulter® LH 750 automated haematology analysers and the results obtained by these two instruments were compared with those provided by Becton Dickinson FACScan flow cytometer using the combination of CD45/CD14 MoAb. Linearity and imprecision were also evaluated. The linearity of both instruments was good. Coulter® LH 750 showed better precision (4.3%) than ADVIA 120 (9.0%) both within and between batch. A significant correlation (r = 0.973) was found between the LH 750 and the flow cytometry method, while a modest one was observed between the latter and the ADVIA 120 (r = 0.880). When comparing the percentage of monocytes by means of one‐way anova and Tukey test, it was found that the LH 750 provided the closest results in comparison with flow cytometry, with no statistical difference between the means (mean difference MO% = 0.6); however the difference was statistically different between the ADVIA 120 and flow cytometry (mean difference MO% = −4.06). These data were confirmed by Altman–Bland and Deming regression analyses.</abstract><cop>Oxford, UK</cop><pub>Blackwell Science Ltd</pub><pmid>15784123</pmid><doi>10.1111/j.1365-2257.2005.00676.x</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0141-9854 |
| ispartof | Clinical and laboratory haematology, 2005-04, Vol.27 (2), p.91-97 |
| issn | 0141-9854 1365-2257 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67539931 |
| source | MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete |
| subjects | Automation Bayer ADVIA 120 Becton Dickinson FACScan Blood Cells - cytology Coulter LH 750 Flow Cytometry Hematologic Tests - instrumentation Hematologic Tests - standards Humans Leukocyte Count - instrumentation monocyte count Monocytes - cytology Reproducibility of Results |
| title | Evaluation of the monocyte counting by two automated haematology analysers compared with flow cytometry |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-16T22%3A12%3A25IST&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=Evaluation%20of%20the%20monocyte%20counting%20by%20two%20automated%20haematology%20analysers%20compared%20with%20flow%20cytometry&rft.jtitle=Clinical%20and%20laboratory%20haematology&rft.au=GRIMALDI,%20E.&rft.date=2005-04&rft.volume=27&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=91&rft.epage=97&rft.pages=91-97&rft.issn=0141-9854&rft.eissn=1365-2257&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/j.1365-2257.2005.00676.x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E67539931%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=67539931&rft_id=info:pmid/15784123&rfr_iscdi=true |