A-164 Comparative Evaluation of the Mindray BC-780 Automated Hematology Analyzer for Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate Measurement

Background The erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) is a crucial nonspecific marker of inflammation, essential for disease monitoring. While the Westergren method is the gold standard for ESR measurement, it is time-consuming, inconvenient, and poses biosafety risks. The Mindray BC-780, a novel automated hematology analyzer, offers an alternative ESR measurement method (Easy-W ESR) that provides results within 1.5 minutes, alongside other hematological parameters. This study aims to assess the clinical feasibility of the Mindray BC-780 by comparing Easy-W ESR with the Westergren method and another commercial automated instrument (Analyzer-i). Methods We collected 627 blood samples from patients at the Hospital Clínico Universidad de Chile. ESR values were measured using the BC-780, Analyzer-i, and Westergren methods and subsequently compared. Passing-Bablok regression analysis (PB-A) was initially conducted to establish the correlation between automated method results and the Westergren method. Bland-Altman analysis (BA-A) followed to quantify the absolute deviation between automated and Westergren method results. Additional PB-A was performed within varying hematocrit (HCT) ranges to evaluate the automated methods* ability to accurately measure ESR, especially for samples with low HCT values. Results The Mindray BC-780 showed a strong correlation with the Westergren method for ESR measurement (r=0.958), superior to the Analyzer-i (r=0.815). Within three ESR intervals, the BC-780 demonstrated a more significant correlation with the Westergren method compared to Analyzer-i: For ESR > 60 mm/h, BC-780 had r=0.821 vs. Analyzer-i*s r=0.315. For 21 mm/h = ESR = 60 mm/h, BC-780 had r=0.782 vs. Analyzer-i*s r=0.377. For ESR = 20 mm/h, BC-780 had r=0.747 vs. Analyzer-i*s r=0.657. The BC-780*s ESR measurements had a smaller mean absolute deviation from the Westergren method (1.638, 6.892, 2.505 for the three intervals) than Analyzer-i (-6.5, 14.8, 7.6 for the three intervals). In normal HCT ranges (35% < HCT), BC-780 correlated more strongly with the Westergren method (r=0.937) than Analyzer-i (r=0.868). Below the normal HCT range, BC-780 maintained a stronger correlation with the Westergren method across two sub-ranges: 25% < HCT = 35%: BC-780 had r=0.922 vs. Analyzer-i*s r=0.665. HCT = 25%: BC-780 had r=0.961 vs. Analyzer-i*s r=0.818. Conclusion The Mindray BC-780 demonstrated ease of setup and minimal instructional requirements for consistent performance. The Easy-W ESR method significantly reduced the total analytical time per sample to 1.5 minutes compared to the Westergren method. The BC-780 showed a higher correlation and agreement with the Westergren gold standard than the commercial Analyzer-i, accurately reporting ESR values even at low HCT levels. Collectively, the Mindray BC-780 presents a faster, safer, and more reliable approach for automated ESR measurement.