Comparison of automated platelet counts and potential effect on transfusion decisions in cancer patients. Academic Article uri icon

Overview

abstract

  • OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the accuracy of platelet counts from various hematology analyzers using a reference immunologic method. METHODS: We tested 403 samples with platelet counts less than 50 × 10(9)/L with the Advia (Siemens, Tarrytown, NY), Sysmex (Mundelein, IL), and Abbott (Santa Clara, CA) analyzers. RESULTS: All methods showed a positive bias, especially at less than 20 × 10(9)/L and less than 10 × 10(9)/L. Undertransfusion risk ranged from 9.1% to 43.3 % in the groups below 20 × 10(9)/L and below 10 × 10(9)/L, respectively. For patients with optical counts more than 10 × 10(9)/L and CD61 less than 10 × 10(9)/L, 64.5% were transfused within 24 hours of the reported count, while 35.5% were transfused in more than 24 hours, after a subsequent optical platelet count of 10 × 10(9)/L or less was reported. CONCLUSIONS: Although optical and impedance methods were shown to be falsely increased in severely thrombocytopenic samples, further studies are needed to determine if more accurate methods would be clinically useful.

publication date

  • November 1, 2013

Research

keywords

  • Automation, Laboratory
  • Blood Transfusion
  • Clinical Laboratory Techniques
  • Neoplasms
  • Platelet Count

Identity

Scopus Document Identifier

  • 84886243945

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

  • 10.1309/AJCP58INTITVGQZI

PubMed ID

  • 24124156

Additional Document Info

volume

  • 140

issue

  • 5