Premium
STANDARDIZATION OF PLATELET COUNTS‐PROBLEMS AND PITFALLS
Author(s) -
Samama M.,
Capelle C.
Publication year - 1980
Publication title -
scandinavian journal of haematology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.904
H-Index - 84
eISSN - 1600-0609
pISSN - 0036-553X
DOI - 10.1111/j.1600-0609.1980.tb01345.x
Subject(s) - platelet , whole blood , platelet rich plasma , biomedical engineering , platelet concentrate , blood flow , population , spectrum analyzer , materials science , medicine , optics , physics , environmental health
In a previous work, we have compared two automated techniques for platelet‐rich plasma using a thrombocounter or whole blood with the continuous flow instrument Auto‐analyzer (AA). More recently, we have tested two instruments using whole blood: the first one, fully automated: Coulter S+; and the other one, semi‐automated: Clay‐Adams. In the present work, these 4 methods are compared to the phase contrast microscope technique, used as reference. The coefficients of variation ranged betweeen 2 and 13 per cent. The coefficients of correlation between the different methods were between 0.92 and 0.96. Platelet distribution curves for platelet volumes obtained in parallel with platelet‐rich plasma and with whole blood in 30 controls, show that platelet population are not significantly different. These instruments count particles and, therefore, necessitate a calibration made by means of platelet standards. Different platelet standards have been studied: those containing latex particles seem to give better results than suspensions of human or animal platelets.