Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
In this study the ability of the Coulter MAXM analyzer to quantify reticulocytes was evaluated. The results were compared with those obtained by a microscopic method according to NCCLS H44-P recommendations and with the results from the automated analyzer Sysmex R-1000. Duplicate samples from 330 patients were analyzed. The reference intervals obtained with the three methods were: MAXM 0.37-1.80%, median 0.83%; manual 0.40-2.30%, median 1.00%; R-1000 0.60-1.95%, median 1.06%. The imprecision (CV) at all concentrations is lower than the microscopic method (low 16.1% vs 67%; normal 16.9% vs 28.9%; high 9.5% vs 13.0%). The MAXM shows a good overall correlation with the microscopic method (intercept 0.01, slope 0.89, r2 = 0.87) despite evidence of a significant overestimation at low concentrations [difference (D) 0.30] and a moderate underestimation at normal (D -0.15) and high (D -1.04) concentrations; the same behavior is shown in comparison with results from the R-1000, with an overall underestimation by MAXM (D -0.26). When compared with the microscopic method, MAXM shows a modest sensitivity at low reticulocyte counts (54.8%) and satisfactory sensitivity for high counts (87.3%), with an overall agreement of 81.3%.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Buttarello et al. (1996) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: