NRBC검사에 있어서 XE-2100과 Manual N-RBC Count의 비교

Abstract

The presence of NRBC is normal for frrst several days in newbom. The presence of NRBC in the peripheral blood in adult is not associated with a specific single clinical diagnosis, but in other situations the appearance of NRBC indicates disordered erythropoiesis. In many cases, NRBC in peripheral blood is an important marker of significant hematological and non-hematological diseases. NRBC should therefore beidentified precisely Most automated hematology analyzers have a flagging system to indicate the presence of NRBC in a sample qualitatively. This makes it necessary to correct the WBC count by substrating the number of NRBC according to manual microscopy. But, manual microscopicexamination has low sensitivity, specificity, and reproducibility. Peripheral blood specimens anticoagulatεd with EDTA were studied. 100samples were analysed on XE-2100 and manual NRBC count. Manual microscopic reference NRBC counts of 10 patient specimens showedgood correlation with XE-2100 (y= 1.2692x - 0.4722 ; r = 0.9354). But, the manual microscopic NRBC result counted 100 cells indicates low correlation (y=0.7787x + 7.6241 ; r = 0.8640). Performance for with-in day precison showed a mean coefficient of variation (CV) for the XE-2100 of = 5.4% (2.0-8.4%), with a mean CV for manual NRBC counts of 22.1%. The between day precision using QC material (SF-CHECK), was 2.94% for lowcontrol 1.29% for normal control, and 1.63% for hlgh control. We conclude that this automated method using XE-2100 was suitable foraccurate NRBC counting in peripheral blood specimens with improved performance in terms of accuracy, reproducibility, and sensitivity when compared to manual microscopic methods.