Performance evaluation of automated cell counts compared with reference methods for body fluid analysis

Michela Seghezzi; Giulia Previtali; Valentina Moioli; Maria Grazia Alessio; Giovanni Guerra; Sabrina Buoro

doi:10.1515/dx-2021-0088

Article

Performance evaluation of automated cell counts compared with reference methods for body fluid analysis

Michela Seghezzi , Giulia Previtali , Valentina Moioli , Maria Grazia Alessio , Giovanni Guerra and Sabrina Buoro

Published/Copyright: October 1, 2021

Published by

Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Submit Manuscript Author Information Explore this Subject

From the journal Diagnosis Volume 9 Issue 3

Abstract

Objectives

Cellular analysis of body fluids (BFs) can assist clinicians for the diagnosis of many medical conditions. The aim of this work is the evaluation of the analytical performance of the UF-5000 body fluid mode (UF-BF) analyzer compared to the gold standard method (optical microscopy, OM) and to XN-1000 (XN-BF), another analyzer produced by the same manufacturer (Sysmex) and with a similar technology for BF analysis.

Methods

One hundred BF samples collected in K₃EDTA tubes were analyzed by UF-BF, XN-BF and OM. The agreement was evaluated using Passing and Bablok regression and Bland–Altman plot analysis. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were selected for evaluating the diagnostic agreement between OM classification and UF-BF parameters.

Results

Comparison between UF-BF and OM, in all BF types, showed Passing and Bablok’s slope comprised between 0.99 (polymorphonuclear cells count, PMN-BF) and 1.39 (mononuclear cells count, MN-BF), the intercepts ranged between 26.47 (PMN-BF parameter) and 226.80 (white blood cell count). Bland–Altman bias was comprised between 7.3% (total cell count, TC-BF) and 52.9% (MN-BF). Comparison between UF-BF and XN-BF in all BF showed slopes ranged between 1.07 (TC-BF and PMN-BF) and 1.16 (MN-BF), intercepts ranged between 8.30 (PMN) and 64.78 (WBC-BF). Bland–Altman bias ranged between 5.8 (TC-BF) and 21.1% (MN-BF). The ROC curve analysis showed an area under the curve ranged between 0.9664 and 1.000.

Conclusions

UF-BF shows very good performance for the differential counts of cells in ascitic, pleural and synovial fluids and therefore it is useful to screen and count cells in this type of BF.

Keywords: body fluids; cellular analysis; optical microscopy; UF-5000; XN-1000

Corresponding author: Michela Seghezzi, MS, Clinical Chemistry Laboratory, ASST Papa Giovanni XXIII Hospital, Piazza OMS, 1 – 24128 Bergamo, Italy, Phone: (+39) 0352674550, Fax: (+39) 0352674939, E-mail: m.seghezzi89@gmail.com

Research funding: None declared.
Author contributions: All authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this manuscript and approved its submission.
Competing interests: Authors state no conflict of interest.
Informed consent: Not applicable.
Ethical approval: Following the assessment of the Ethics Committee of ASST Papa Giovanni XXIII, this type of study does not require the approval of the bioethics committee. The sample data were subjected to anonymization procedure.

References

1. Sandhaus, LM. Body fluid cell counts by automated methods. Clin Lab Med 2015;35:93–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cll.2014.10.003.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

2. Fleming, C, Russcher, H, Lindemans, J, de Jonge, R. Clinical relevance and contemporary methods for counting blood cells in body fluids suspected of inflammatory disease. Clin Chem Lab Med 2015;53:1689–706. https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2014-1247.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

3. Bignardi, GE. Flow cytometry for the microscopy of body fluids in patients with suspected infection. J Clin Pathol 2015;68:870–8. https://doi.org/10.1136/jclinpath-2015-203088.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

4. Yang, D, Zhou, Y, Chen, B. Performance evaluation and result comparison of the automated hematology analyzers Abbott CD 3700, Sysmex XE 2100 and Coulter LH 750 for cell counts in serous fluids. Clin Chim Acta 2013;419:113–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cca.2013.01.022.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

5. Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute. Body fluid analysis for cellular composition; approved guideline. CLSI document H56-A. Wayne, PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2006.Search in Google Scholar

6. Ruprecht, K, Kainzinger, F, Heppner, FL, Weimann, A. Automated vs. manual cerebrospinal fluid cell counts: a work and cost analysis comparing the Sysmex XE-5000 and the Fuchs-Rosenthal manual counting chamber. Int J Lab Hematol 2011;33:629–37. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-553X.2011.01339.x.Search in Google Scholar

7. Mahieu, S, Vertessen, F, Van der Planken, M. Evaluation of ADVIA 120 CSF assay (Bayer) vs. chamber counting of cerebrospinal fluid specimens. Clin Lab Haematol 2004;26:195–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2257.2004.00611.x.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

8. Zimmermann, M, Ruprecht, K, Kainzinger, F, Heppner, FL, Weimann, A. Automated vs. manual cerebrospinal fluid cell counts: a work and cost analysis comparing the Sysmex XE-5000 and the Fuchs–Rosenthal manual counting chamber. Int J Lab Hematol 2011;33:629–37. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-553x.2011.01339.x.Search in Google Scholar

9. de Jonge, R, Brouwer, R, de Graaf, MT, Luitwieler, RL, Fleming, C, de Frankrijker-Merkestijn, M, et al.. Evaluation of the newbody fluidmode on the Sysmex XE-5000 for counting leukocytes and erythrocytes in cerebrospinal fluid and other body fluids. Clin Chem Lab Med 2010;48:665–75. https://doi.org/10.1515/CCLM.2010.108.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

10. Huang, WH, Lu, LP, Wu, K, Guo, FY, Guo, J, Yu, JL, et al.. Extent of agreement between the body fluid model of Sysmex XN-20 and the manual microscopy method. J Clin Lab Anal 2017;31:e22101. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcla.22101.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

11. Cho, J, Oh, J, Lee, SG, Lee, YH, Song, J, Kim, JH. Performance evaluation of body fluid cellular analysis using the Beckman Coulter UniCel DxH 800, Sysmex XN-350, and UF-5000 automated cellular analyzers. Ann Lab Med 2020;40:122–30. https://doi.org/10.3343/alm.2020.40.2.122.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

12. Cho, YU, Chi, HS, Park, SH, Jang, S, Kim, YJ, Park, CJ. Body fluid cellular analysis using the Sysmex XN-2000 automatic hematology analyzer: focusing on malignant samples. Int J Lab Hematol 2015;37:346–56. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijlh.12292.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

13. Buoro, S, Seghezzi, M, Baigorria Vaca, MDC, Manenti, B, Moioli, V, Previtali, G, et al.. Comparison between optical microscopy and automation for cytometric analysis of pericardial fluids in a cohort of adult subjects undergoing cardiac surgery. J Clin Pathol 2019;72:493–500. https://doi.org/10.1136/jclinpath-2019-205788.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

14. Buoro, S, Peruzzi, B, Fanelli, A, Seghezzi, M, Manenti, B, Lorubbio, M, et al.. Two-site evaluation of the diagnostic performance of the Sysmex XN Body Fluid (BF) module for cell count and differential in cerebrospinal fluid. Int J Lab Hematol 2018;40:26–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijlh.12723.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

15. Seghezzi, M, Manenti, B, Previtali, G, Alessio, MG, Dominoni, P, Buoro, S. Preliminary evaluation of UF-5000 Body Fluid Mode for automated cerebrospinal fluid cell counting. Clin Chim Acta 2017;473:133–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cca.2017.08.026.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

16. Buoro, S, Seghezzi, M, Manenti, B, Mecca, T, Candiago, E, Vidali, M, et al.. Reliability of automated synovial fluid cell counting with Mindray BC-6800 body fluid mode. Int J Lab Hematol 2017;39:337–46. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijlh.12632.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

17. Seghezzi, M, Buoro, S, Manenti, B, Mecca, T, Ferrari, R, Zappalà, G, et al.. Optimization of cellular analysis of synovial fluids by optical microscopy and automated count using the Sysmex XN Body Fluid Mode. Clin Chim Acta 2016;462:41–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cca.2016.08.018.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

18. Buoro, S, Mecca, T, Azzarà, G, Seghezzi, M, Dominoni, P, Crippa, A, et al.. Cell population data and reflex testing rules of cell analysis in pleural and ascitic fluids using body fluid mode on Sysmex XN-9000. Clin Chim Acta 2015;452:92–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cca.2015.11.005.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

19. Buoro, S, Mecca, T, Azzarà, G, Seghezzi, M, Candiago, E, Gianatti, A, et al.. Mindray BC-6800 body fluid mode, performance of nucleated cells, and differential count in ascitic and pleural fluids. Int J Lab Hematol 2016;38:90–101. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijlh.12446.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

20. Yang, D, Zhou, Y, Chen, B. Performance evaluation and result comparison of the automated hematology analyzers Abbott CD 3700, Sysmex XE 2100 and Coulter LH 750 for cell counts in serous fluids. Clin Chim Acta 2013;419:113–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cca.2013.01.022.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

21. Takemura, H, Ai, T, Kimura, K, Nagasaka, K, Takahashi, T, Tsuchiya, K, et al.. Evaluation of cell count and classification capabilities in body fluids using a fully automated Sysmex XN equipped with high-sensitive Analysis (hsA) mode and DI-60 hematology analyzer system. PloS One 2018;13:e0195923. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0195923.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

22. Cho, YU, You, E, Jang, S, Park, CJ. Validation of reflex testing rules and establishment of a new workflow for body fluid cell analysis using a Sysmex XN-550 automatic hematology analyzer. Int J Lab Hematol 2018;40:258–67. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijlh.12774.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

23. Bourner, G, De la Salle, B, George, T, Tabe, Y, Baum, H, Culp, N, et al.. ICSH guidelines for the verification and performance of automated cell counters for body fluids. Int J Lab Hematol 2014;36:598–612. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijlh.12196.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

24. Buoro, S, Ottomano, C, Appassiti Esposito, S, Gherardi, P, Alessio, MG, Crippa, A, et al.. Analytical and clinical evaluation of Sysmex UF1000i for automated screening of cerebrospinal fluids. J Med Biochem 2013;32:1–6.Search in Google Scholar

25. Nanos, NE, Delanghe, JR. Evaluation of Sysmex UF-1000i for use in cerebrospinal fluid analysis. Clin Chim Acta 2008;39:30–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cca.2008.02.020.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

26. Buoro, S, Apassiti Esposito, S, Alessio, MG, Crippa, A, Ottomano, C, Lippi, G. Automated cerebrospinal fluid cell counts using the new body fluid mode of Sysmex UF-1000i. J Clin Lab Anal 2016;30:381–91. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcla.21866.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

27. Buoro, S, Gustinetti, R, Dominoni, P, Alessio, MG, Filisetti, P, Lucà, MG, et al.. Analytical evaluation of Sysmex UF-1000i for flow cytometric analysis of peritoneal fluid. Clin Biochem 2012;45:1263–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2012.05.005.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

28. Previtali, G, Ravasio, R, Seghezzi, M, Buoro, S, Alessio, MG. Performance evaluation of the new fully automated urine particle analyser UF-5000 compared to the reference method of the Fuchs-Rosenthal chamber. Clin Chim Acta 2017;472:123–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cca.2017.07.028.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

29. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Reference leukocyte (WBC) differential count (proportional) and evaluation of instrumental methods; approved guideline, 2nd ed. CLSI document H20–A2. Wayne, PA: Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute; 2010.Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2021-06-25

Accepted: 2021-09-10

Published Online: 2021-10-01

You are currently not able to access this content.

Articles in the same Issue

https://doi.org/10.1515/dx-2021-0088

Keywords for this article

body fluids; cellular analysis; optical microscopy; UF-5000; XN-1000