Performance of CellaVision DM96 automated image analysis system for determining red blood cell morphological abnormalities

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1673-8640.2018.05.013

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective To evaluate the performance of CellaVision DM96 automated image analysis system for determining red blood cell morphological abnormalities. Methods A total of 500 ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid-K₂anticoagulated peripheral blood samples were made into blood smears and stained,and they were determined by DM96 and manual microscopy. The results of manual microscopies were as standard. The sensitivity and specificity of DM96 were evaluated. Results By manual microscopy,there were 12 kinds of red blood cell morphological abnormalities. The overall accuracy of DM96 was 94.9%. The sensitivities ranged from 23.1% to 89.7% according to different kinds of red blood cell morphological abnormalities,while the specificity and consistency were >90% for all red blood cell morphological abnormalities. Conclusions CellaVision DM96 automated image analysis system plays a role in identifying red blood cell morphological abnormalities. However,positive samples should be verified by manual microscopy.

Key words: Automated image analysis system, Red blood cell morphological abnormality, Performance evaluation

CLC Number:

R446.1

SHEN Huiying, LIN Xiaoyi, YANG Hui, ZHENG Jianxin. Performance of CellaVision DM96 automated image analysis system for determining red blood cell morphological abnormalities[J]. Laboratory Medicine, 2018, 33(5): 428-430.

Figures/Tables 1

References 6

[1]	PALMER L,BRIGGS C,MCFADDEN S,et al.ICSH recommendations for the standardization of nomenclature and grading of peripheral blood cell morphological features[J]. Int J Lab Hematol,2015,37(3):287-303.
[2]	CEELIE H,DINKELAAR R B, VAN GELDER W.Examination of peripheral blood films using automated microscopy; evaluation of Diffmaster Octavia and Cellavision DM96[J]. J Clin Pathol,2007,60(1):72-79.
[3]	BRIGGS C,LONGAIR I,SLAVIK M,et al.Can automated blood film analysis replace the manual differential?An evaluation of the CellaVision DM96 automated image analysis system[J]. Int J Lab Hematol,2009,31(1):48-60.
[4]	NAKASHIMA M O,DOYLE T J,PHELAN-LEWIN K,et al.Assessment of semi-quantitative grading of red blood cell abnormalities utilizing images from the CellaVision DM96 compared to manual light microscopy[J]. Int J Lab Hematol,2017,39(5):e110-e112.
[5]	HORN C L,MANSOOR A,WOOD B,et al.Performance of the CellaVisio(®)DM96 system for detecting red blood cell morphologic abnormalities[J]. J Pathol Inform,2015,6:11.
[6]	CRIEL M,GODEFROID M,DECKERS B,et al.Evaluation of the red blood cell advanced software application on the CellaVision DM96[J]. Int J Lab Hematol,2016,38(4):366-374.

异常红细胞形态	敏感性	特异性	一致性	假阳性率	假阴性率
嗜多色红细胞	88.1	96.1	93.0	3.9	11.9
泪滴状红细胞	86.3	95.8	93.6	4.2	13.7
低色素红细胞	81.7	95.7	94.0	4.3	18.3
大红细胞	33.3	99.1	92.4	0.9	66.7
毫焦小体	89.7	96.1	95.6	3.9	10.3
小红细胞	77.1	96.6	95.2	3.4	22.9
靶形红细胞	83.3	96.2	95.4	3.8	16.7
球形红细胞	80.0	91.6	91.0	8.4	20.0
镰形红细胞	71.4	98.5	97.4	1.5	28.6
棘形红细胞	75.0	99.8	98.8	0.2	25.0
裂红细胞	73.3	97.5	96.8	2.5	26.7
口形红细胞	23.1	97.5	95.6	2.5	76.9

异常红细胞形态	敏感性	特异性	一致性	假阳性率	假阴性率
嗜多色红细胞	88.1	96.1	93.0	3.9	11.9
泪滴状红细胞	86.3	95.8	93.6	4.2	13.7
低色素红细胞	81.7	95.7	94.0	4.3	18.3
大红细胞	33.3	99.1	92.4	0.9	66.7
毫焦小体	89.7	96.1	95.6	3.9	10.3
小红细胞	77.1	96.6	95.2	3.4	22.9
靶形红细胞	83.3	96.2	95.4	3.8	16.7
球形红细胞	80.0	91.6	91.0	8.4	20.0
镰形红细胞	71.4	98.5	97.4	1.5	28.6
棘形红细胞	75.0	99.8	98.8	0.2	25.0
裂红细胞	73.3	97.5	96.8	2.5	26.7
口形红细胞	23.1	97.5	95.6	2.5	76.9

[1]	TAN Chunyan, ZHOU Ying, MO Zhijiang. Errors in Appendix B examples of WS/T 505—2017 and correction [J]. Laboratory Medicine, 2023, 38(6): 569-573.
[2]	YANG Xiaodong, LI Quanle, PAN Qingqing, ZHOU Jing, XIE Yangmin, ZOU Jihua, SHEN Min, ZHANG Man. Establishment and performance evaluation of candidate reference measurement procedure for the determination of immunosuppressive drugs in human whole blood by ID-LC-MS/MS [J]. Laboratory Medicine, 2023, 38(3): 215-222.
[3]	LIU Congcong, LI Jiaping, ZHOU Hongwei. Performance evaluation of 2 mass spectrometry systems in clinical microbial identification [J]. Laboratory Medicine, 2022, 37(11): 1084-1088.
[4]	TIAN Yueru, WANG Jingjing, AI Fuqi, MA Yimin, WANG Bei, JIANG Xiaofei. Performance evaluation of Vitek 2 Compact AST-N334,AST-N335,AST-P639 Chinese antimicrobial susceptibility test cards [J]. Laboratory Medicine, 2021, 36(4): 417-423.
[5]	Clinical Diagnosis and Laboratory Medicine Branch of China Maternal and Child Health Association. Expert consensus on establishment of standards for the performance evaluation of systems for whole blood C-reactive protein determination of Chinese children [J]. Laboratory Medicine, 2021, 36(12): 1201-1205.
[6]	YUE Chaoyan, DUAN Chaohui, ZHANG Di, WEI Jie, LUO Xiaohong, ZHANG Qianlan, WU Yong, YING Chunmei. Performance evaluation of acridinium ester labeled direct chemiluminescence method for the detection of AMH and establishment of adult female AMH reference interval [J]. Laboratory Medicine, 2021, 36(1): 95-100.
[7]	GUO Ping, CHEN Liting, LIAO Bing, WANG Jianbiao. Roles of automated image analysis system and CytoDiff flow cytometry for the diagnosis and treatment of leucopenia [J]. Laboratory Medicine, 2020, 35(4): 349-353.
[8]	SONG Jingchen, ZENG Jie, CHEN Tong, ZHANG Chuanbao, PAN Qi, LI Chuanbao, WU Quanying, TANG Dandan, WANG Qin. Performance evaluation of portable glucometers in a hospital of Beijing [J]. Laboratory Medicine, 2020, 35(11): 1186-1189.
[9]	LIU Yang, ZHANG Zhiping, PENG Daorong, SONG Liuwei, GE Shengxiang, HAO Xiaoke, LIU Jiayun. Establishment and performance evaluation of chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay for the determination of high concentration HbsAg [J]. Laboratory Medicine, 2020, 35(10): 1056-1061.
[10]	LIU Huiling, WANG Bing, ZHANG Ying, ZHU Jiawen, OUYANG Qinghui. Differences of sigma performance evaluation by using allowable total errors and biases from different sources [J]. Laboratory Medicine, 2019, 34(7): 648-650.
[11]	OU Yuanzhu, TANG Liping, YU Xiaoxuan, LIU Wenbin. Performance evaluation of 3 kinds of serum cholinesterase determination kits by manual DGKC method [J]. Laboratory Medicine, 2019, 34(4): 355-359.
[12]	LIN Feiran, LIU Wenbin, OU Yuanzhu, YU Xiaoxuan, GE Danhong, TANG Liping. Performance evaluation of different homocysteine determination systems [J]. Laboratory Medicine, 2019, 34(1): 51-55.
[13]	WANG Lei, CHEN Weiqin, XU Minyi, CHEN Xudong. Establishment of magnetic particle chemiluminescence for the determination of urinary type Ⅳ collagen and its clinical application in membranous nephropathy [J]. Laboratory Medicine, 2018, 33(5): 442-446.
[14]	SHEN Min, YANG Xiaodong, WANG Lin, ZOU Jihua, ZHANG Man, ZOU Bingde. Establishment and performance evaluation of candidate reference measurement procedure for serum total homocysteine by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry [J]. Laboratory Medicine, 2018, 33(11): 1018-1025.
[15]	DONG Yiyu, WU Yizheng, SHEN Lili, CHEN Qun. Establishment and performance of nano particle-enhanced turbidimetric immunoassay for determining serum lactate dehydrogenase isoenzyme 3 [J]. Laboratory Medicine, 2017, 32(2): 138-142.