国际检验医学杂志
國際檢驗醫學雜誌
국제검험의학잡지
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LABORATORY MEDICINE
2015年
8期
1090-1091,1093
,共3页
血液分析仪%网织红细胞%未成熟网织红细胞指数%高散射光网织红细胞百分比
血液分析儀%網織紅細胞%未成熟網織紅細胞指數%高散射光網織紅細胞百分比
혈액분석의%망직홍세포%미성숙망직홍세포지수%고산사광망직홍세포백분비
hematology analyzer%reticulocyte%immature reticulocyte fraction%high light scatter reticulocyte
目的：分析Beckman‐Coulter LH780与Sysmex XN‐1000两台血液分析仪的网织红细胞（Ret）等参数的可比性和相关性。方法用上述两台仪器分别检测80份血常规标本，比较红细胞（RBC ）计数、Ret百分率（Ret％）、Ret绝对值（Ret＃）和未成熟网织红细胞指数（IRF），并对Ret％、Ret＃和IRF进行相关性分析。将LH780的高散射光网织红细胞百分比（HLR％）和XN‐1000的中荧光强度网织红细胞百分比（MFR％）＋高荧光强度网织红细胞百分比（HFR％）做比较，观察采用两种仪器的计算方法时其相关程度并探讨 HLR％的应用价值。结果两仪器所测 RBC计数、Ret％和 Ret＃比较差异均无统计学意义（ P＞0．05），而IRF比较差异有统计学意义（P＜0．05）。两仪器RBC计数的相对偏差符合率为97．5％，Ret％、Ret＃、IRF的相关系数r分别为0．912、0．895和0．666。采用XN‐1000和LH780计算方法时，HLR％和 MFR％＋ HFR％比较差异均有统计学意义（P＜0．05），且均有相关性（r分别为0．666、0．767）。结论两仪器的 RBC计数符合比对要求，Ret％、Ret＃均呈高度相关，而IRF须建立各仪器的参考范围。
目的：分析Beckman‐Coulter LH780與Sysmex XN‐1000兩檯血液分析儀的網織紅細胞（Ret）等參數的可比性和相關性。方法用上述兩檯儀器分彆檢測80份血常規標本，比較紅細胞（RBC ）計數、Ret百分率（Ret％）、Ret絕對值（Ret＃）和未成熟網織紅細胞指數（IRF），併對Ret％、Ret＃和IRF進行相關性分析。將LH780的高散射光網織紅細胞百分比（HLR％）和XN‐1000的中熒光彊度網織紅細胞百分比（MFR％）＋高熒光彊度網織紅細胞百分比（HFR％）做比較，觀察採用兩種儀器的計算方法時其相關程度併探討 HLR％的應用價值。結果兩儀器所測 RBC計數、Ret％和 Ret＃比較差異均無統計學意義（ P＞0．05），而IRF比較差異有統計學意義（P＜0．05）。兩儀器RBC計數的相對偏差符閤率為97．5％，Ret％、Ret＃、IRF的相關繫數r分彆為0．912、0．895和0．666。採用XN‐1000和LH780計算方法時，HLR％和 MFR％＋ HFR％比較差異均有統計學意義（P＜0．05），且均有相關性（r分彆為0．666、0．767）。結論兩儀器的 RBC計數符閤比對要求，Ret％、Ret＃均呈高度相關，而IRF鬚建立各儀器的參攷範圍。
목적：분석Beckman‐Coulter LH780여Sysmex XN‐1000량태혈액분석의적망직홍세포（Ret）등삼수적가비성화상관성。방법용상술량태의기분별검측80빈혈상규표본，비교홍세포（RBC ）계수、Ret백분솔（Ret％）、Ret절대치（Ret＃）화미성숙망직홍세포지수（IRF），병대Ret％、Ret＃화IRF진행상관성분석。장LH780적고산사광망직홍세포백분비（HLR％）화XN‐1000적중형광강도망직홍세포백분비（MFR％）＋고형광강도망직홍세포백분비（HFR％）주비교，관찰채용량충의기적계산방법시기상관정도병탐토 HLR％적응용개치。결과량의기소측 RBC계수、Ret％화 Ret＃비교차이균무통계학의의（ P＞0．05），이IRF비교차이유통계학의의（P＜0．05）。량의기RBC계수적상대편차부합솔위97．5％，Ret％、Ret＃、IRF적상관계수r분별위0．912、0．895화0．666。채용XN‐1000화LH780계산방법시，HLR％화 MFR％＋ HFR％비교차이균유통계학의의（P＜0．05），차균유상관성（r분별위0．666、0．767）。결론량의기적 RBC계수부합비대요구，Ret％、Ret＃균정고도상관，이IRF수건립각의기적삼고범위。
Objective To analyze the comparability and correlation of reticulocyte parameters on the Beckman‐Coulter LH780 (LH780)and Sysmex XN‐1000(XN‐1000)hematology analyzers .Methods 80 blood samples were measured by the two instru‐ments ,the RBC count ,percentage of Ret(Ret% ) ,Ret value(Ret#)and immature reticulocyte fraction(IRF) were analyzed ,and the correlation of Ret% ,Ret# and IRF between two instruments were also analysed .The correlation between percentage of high laser reticulocyte(HLR% ) of LH780 and percentage of middle fluorescent reticulogyte(MFR% )+percentage of high fluorescent reticu‐locyte(HFR% ) of XN‐1000 were compared using two calculation methods of each instrument ,and the application value of HLR%were analysed .Results No significant differences were founded in RBC count ,Ret% ,and Ret# between the two instruments(P>0 .05) ,while there was statistical difference in IRF between the the two instruments (P<0 .05) .The relative deviation coincidence rate of RBC count was 97 .5% ,the correlation coefficent (r) of Ret% ,Ret# and IRF were 0 .912 ,0 .895 and 0 .666 respectively . There were statistical differences and correlations between HLR% and MFR% + HFR% when using calculation method of XN‐1000 and LH780 respectively(r were 0 .666 and 0 .767 respectively ,P<0 .05) .Conclusion The RBC count could meet the matc‐hing requirement ,and the Ret% and Ret # may be highly correlated on the two instruments .While the reference range of IRF should be established in each instrument .
