Dataset Information

Comparative clinical study of canine and feline total blood cell count results with seven in-clinic and two commercial laboratory hematology analyzers.

ABSTRACT: A CBC is an integral part of the assessment of health and disease in companion animals. While in the past newer technologies for CBC analysis were limited to large clinical pathology laboratories, several smaller and affordable automated hematology analyzers have been developed for in-clinic use.The purpose of this study was to compare CBC results generated by 7 in-clinic laser- and impedance-based hematology instruments and 2 commercial laboratory analyzers.Over a 3-month period, fresh EDTA-anticoagulated blood samples from healthy and diseased dogs (n=260) and cats (n=110) were analyzed on the LaserCyte, ForCyte, MS45, Heska CBC, Scil Vet ABC, VetScan HMT, QBC Vet Autoread, CELL-DYN 3500, and ADVIA 120 analyzers. Results were compared by regression correlation (linear, Deming, Passing-Bablok) and Bland-Altman bias plots using the ADVIA as the criterion standard for all analytes except HCT, which was compared with manual PCV. Precision, linearity, and carryover also were evaluated.For most analytes, the in-clinic analyzers and the CELL-DYN performed similarly and correlated well with the ADVIA. The biases ranged from -0.6 to 2.4 x 10(9)/L for WBC count, 0 to 0.9 x 10(12)/L for RBC count, -1.5 to 0.7 g/dL for hemoglobin concentration, -4.3 to 8.3 fL for MCV, and -69.3 to 77.2 x 10(9)/L for platelet count. Compared with PCV, the HCT on most analyzers had a bias from 0.1% to 7.2%. Canine reticulocyte counts on the LaserCyte and ForCyte correlated but had a negative bias compared with those on the ADVIA. Precision, linearity, and carryover results were excellent for most analyzers.Total WBC and RBC counts were acceptable on all in-clinic hematology instruments studied, with limitations for some RBC parameters and platelet counts. Together with evaluation of a blood film, these in-clinic instruments can provide useful information on canine and feline patients in veterinary practices.

SUBMITTER: Becker M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2712287 | biostudies-literature | 2008 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparative clinical study of canine and feline total blood cell count results with seven in-clinic and two commercial laboratory hematology analyzers.

Becker Martina M Moritz Andreas A Giger Urs U

Veterinary clinical pathology 20081201 4

<h4>Background</h4>A CBC is an integral part of the assessment of health and disease in companion animals. While in the past newer technologies for CBC analysis were limited to large clinical pathology laboratories, several smaller and affordable automated hematology analyzers have been developed for in-clinic use.<h4>Objectives</h4>The purpose of this study was to compare CBC results generated by 7 in-clinic laser- and impedance-based hematology instruments and 2 commercial laboratory analyzers ...[more]

PMID: 19055571

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAntigen point-of-care tests (AgPOCTs) can accelerate SARS-CoV-2 testing. As some AgPOCTs have become available, interest is growing in their utility and performance. Here we aimed to compare the analytical sensitivity and specificity of seven commercially available AgPOCT devices.MethodsIn a single-centre, laboratory evaluation study, we compared AgPOCT products from seven suppliers: the Abbott Panbio COVID-19 Ag Rapid Test, the RapiGEN BIOCREDIT COVID-19 Ag, the Healgen Coronavirus Ag Rapid Test Cassette (Swab), the Coris BioConcept COVID-19 Ag Respi-Strip, the R-Biopharm RIDA QUICK SARS-CoV-2 Antigen, the nal von minden NADAL COVID-19 Ag Test, and the Roche-SD Biosensor SARS-CoV Rapid Antigen Test. Tests were evaluated on recombinant SARS-CoV-2 nucleoprotein, cultured endemic and emerging coronaviruses, stored respiratory samples with known SARS-CoV-2 viral loads, stored samples from patients with respiratory pathogens other than SARS-CoV-2, and self-sampled swabs from healthy volunteers. We estimated analytical sensitivity in terms of approximate viral concentrations (quantified by real-time RT-PCR) that yielded positive AgPOCT results, and specificity in terms of propensity to generate false-positive results.FindingsIn 138 clinical samples with quantified SARS-CoV-2 viral load, the 95% limit of detection (concentration at which 95% of test results were positive) in six of seven AgPOCT products ranged between 2·07 × 106 and 2·86 × 107 copies per swab, with an outlier (RapiGEN) at 1·57 × 1010 copies per swab. The assays showed no cross-reactivity towards cell culture or tissue culture supernatants containing any of the four endemic human coronaviruses (HCoV‑229E, HCoV‑NL63, HCoV‑OC43, or HCoV‑HKU1) or MERS-CoV, with the exception of the Healgen assay in one repeat test on HCoV-HKU1 supernatant. SARS-CoV was cross-detected by all assays. Cumulative specificities among stored clinical samples with non-SARS-CoV-2 infections (n=100) and self-samples from healthy volunteers (n=35; cumulative sample n=135) ranged between 98·5% (95% CI 94·2-99·7) and 100·0% (97·2-100·0) in five products, with two outliers at 94·8% (89·2-97·7; R-Biopharm) and 88·9% (82·1-93·4; Healgen). False-positive results did not appear to be associated with any specific respiratory pathogen.InterpretationThe sensitivity range of most AgPOCTs overlaps with SARS-CoV-2 viral loads typically observed in the first week of symptoms, which marks the infectious period in most patients. The AgPOCTs with limit of detections that approximate virus concentrations at which patients are infectious might enable shortcuts in decision making in various areas of health care and public health.FundingEU's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme, German Ministry of Research, German Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy, German Ministry of Health, and Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Dataset Information

Comparative clinical study of canine and feline total blood cell count results with seven in-clinic and two commercial laboratory hematology analyzers.

Publications

Comparative clinical study of canine and feline total blood cell count results with seven in-clinic and two commercial laboratory hematology analyzers.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets