PDF herunterladen
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · J Lab Physicians 2017; 9(01): 001-004
DOI: 10.4103/0974-2727.189233
Original Article

Utility of Peripheral Film Findings and its Correlation with Automated Analyzer – An Audit from Tertiary Care Hospital

Sidra Asad
Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, The Aga Khan University, Karachi, Pakistan
,
Imran Ahmed
Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, The Aga Khan University, Karachi, Pakistan
,
Natasha Ali
Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine and Oncology, The Aga Khan University, Karachi, Pakistan
› Institutsangaben
Financial support and sponsorship Nil.
› Weitere Informationen
Auch verfügbar auf
 als PDF herunterladen Lizenzen und Reprints

ABSTRACT

Background and Objective: With the advent of automated hematology analyzer, the use of traditional microscopy of blood film has become limited. The objective of our study was to determine the percentage of peripheral blood smear review in our institution in the era of automation and to identify reasons of manual review.

Materials and Methods: This was a prospective audit from January 1, 2015, to January 15, 2015. Consecutive complete blood count (CBC) samples and peripheral smear requests made up the sample size. All age groups and genders were included. CBCs were performed on Sysmex XE-5000. The variables to be analyzed included inpatient and outpatient samples, frequency of peripheral film review, identifying reasons of smear review, and addition of information missed by the automated analyzer.

Results: We analyzed 1200 consecutive CBC samples. Peripheral smear was reviewed in 500 (42%) of the cases of which, 241 were inpatient, and 259 were outpatient samples. In 384/500, the findings of hematology analyzer correlated with peripheral smear review. Flags identified included nucleated red blood cells (NRBCs) in 155 (40%), immature white blood cell (WBC) 129 (34%), and atypical lymphocytes 100 (26%). In 23% of the cases, the analyzer missed important findings. The sensitivity of abnormal histogram in our study was 91.3%, while the sensitivity of abnormal parameters was 100%.

Conclusion: Peripheral smear review was performed in 42% of the cases. The analyzer identified NRBC, immature WBC precursors, and atypical lymphocytes as the most common abnormality. The information correlated in 77% of the cases.

Key words

Automated analyzer - complete blood count - peripheral film


Publikationsverlauf

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
19. Februar 2020

© 2017.

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Private Ltd.
A-12, Second Floor, Sector -2, NOIDA -201301, India

 

  • REFERENCES

  • 1 Adewoyin AS, Nwogoh B. Peripheral blood film ߝ A review. Ann Ib Postgrad Med 2014;12:71-9.
  • 2 Bain BJ. Diagnosis from the blood smear. N Engl J Med 2005;353:498-507.
  • 3 Lantis KL, Harris RJ, Davis G, Renner N, Finn WG. Elimination of instrument-driven reflex manual differential leukocyte counts. Optimization of manual blood smear review criteria in a high-volume automated hematology laboratory. Am J Clin Pathol 2003;119:656-62.
  • 4 Briggs CJ, Linssen J, Longair I, Machin SJ. Improved flagging rates on the Sysmex XE-5000 compared with the XE-2100 reduce the number of manual film reviews and increase laboratory productivity. Am J Clin Pathol 2011;136:309-16.
  • 5 Ford J. Red blood cell morphology. Int J Lab Hematol 2013;35:351-7.
  • 6 Novis DA, Walsh M, Wilkinson D, St. Louis M, Ben-Ezra J. Laboratory productivity and the rate of manual peripheral blood smear review: A College of American Pathologists Q-Probes study of 95,141 complete blood count determinations performed in 263 institutions. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2006;130:596-601.
  • 7 Gulati G, Song J, Florea AD, Gong J. Purpose and criteria for blood smear scan, blood smear examination, and blood smear review. Ann Lab Med 2013;33:1-7.
  • 8 Grotto HZ. Why and how validate criteria by manual smear review to improve laboratory productivity? Rev Bras Hematol Hemoter 2015;37:67-8.
  • 9 Froom P, Havis R, Barak M. The rate of manual peripheral blood smear reviews in outpatients. Clin Chem Lab Med 2009;47:1401-5.
  • 10 Comar SR, Malvezzi M, Pasquini R. Are the review criteria for automated complete blood counts of the International Society of Laboratory Hematology suitable for all hematology laboratories? Rev Bras Hematol Hemoter 2014;36:219-25.
  • 11 Pratumvinit B, Wongkrajang P, Reesukumal K, Klinbua C, Niamjoy P. Validation and optimization of criteria for manual smear review following automated blood cell analysis in a large university hospital. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2013;137:408-14.
  • 12 Xing Y, Wang JZ, Pu CW, Shang K, Yan ZL, Bai YZ, et al. Establishment and evaluation of review criteria for ADVIA 120/2120 and different series of hematology analyzers. Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi 2010;90:1526-30.