These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Platelet count evaluation compared with the immunoplatelet reference method and performance evaluation of the hematology analyzer Celltac G.
    Author: Yamade K, Yamaguchi T, Nagai Y, Kamisako T.
    Journal: Int J Lab Hematol; 2021 Oct; 43(5):927-938. PubMed ID: 33548102.
    Abstract:
    INTRODUCTION: The hematology analyzer, Celltac G (Nihon Kohden), designed to improve platelet count (Plt) accuracy, is equipped with new sheath flow control technology. Clinical evaluation of the Celltac G was assessed by comparability with XN-9000 (Sysmex Corporation) and CELL-DYN Sapphire (Abbott Diagnostics). The accuracy of all three analyzers, which use different measuring principles, was compared with the immunoplatelet reference method (FCM-Ref). METHODS: Repeatability and within-laboratory imprecision were assessed using 10 clinical fresh whole blood samples and three control materials with differing levels. Carryover was evaluated using 6 clinical fresh whole blood samples. For method comparison between the three analyzers, 388 samples were used. Plt accuracy among the three analyzers was evaluated using 54 blood samples, including 42 samples with a platelet count less than 50x109 /L. The International Council for Standardization in Haematology method for Plt was used as the FCM-Ref. RESULTS: The Celltac G showed sufficient performance with regard to imprecision, carryover, and comparability. The Analytical Measurement Interval (AMI) and linearity for all parameters of Plt were validated within 4.6 to 809.1 (×109 /L). All hematology analyzers showed some disagreement in Plt when compared with the immunoplatelet reference method. CONCLUSION: The Celltac G hematology analyzer is suitable for clinical use. Platelet count evaluation of the three analyzers suggests the need to determine a reportable measurement interval (RMI) in the clinical laboratory for adequate reporting of a Plt from multiple different values.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]