Premium
Performance evaluation of the S ysmex poc H ‐100i V D iff hematology analyzer for analysis of canine, feline, equine, and bovine blood
Author(s) -
Riond Barbara,
Weissenbacher Stefan,
HofmannLehmann Regina,
Lutz Hans
Publication year - 2011
Publication title -
veterinary clinical pathology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.537
H-Index - 51
eISSN - 1939-165X
pISSN - 0275-6382
DOI - 10.1111/j.1939-165x.2011.00372.x
Subject(s) - cats , medicine , veterinary medicine , cell counting , hematology , hematology analyzer , whole blood , population , zoology , pathology , biology , environmental health , cancer , cell cycle
Background The S ysmex poc H ‐100i V D iff is an impedance hematology analyzer recently introduced for point‐of‐care use in veterinary practices in E urope. Objective The purpose of this study was to validate the poc H ‐100i V D iff for analysis of blood samples from dogs, cats, horses, and cattle. Methods Fresh EDTA ‐blood samples from healthy and ill dogs (115), cats (94), horses (91), and cattle (78) were analyzed on the poc H ‐100i V D iff and the C ell‐ D yn 3500. Results of the automated WBC differential counts were compared with the manual differential counts for 77 dogs, 65 cats, 40 horses, and 46 cattle. HCT were compared with PCV s obtained by microhematocrit centrifugation. Furthermore, precision, linearity, carry‐over, cell aging, and clinical relevance of the poc H ‐100i V D iff results were assessed. Results Most of the CBC results obtained by the poc H ‐100i V D iff correlated well with those of the C ell‐ D yn 3500. Slightly low correlation was observed for canine MCV and hemoglobin concentration. Lymphocytes correlated well in horses and cattle, but less well in cats and dogs. The mixed cell population termed “ OTHRS ” (all granulocytes and monocytes for horses and cattle; neutrophils, monocytes, and basophils for cats and dogs) correlated well in all tested species. The instrument overestimated feline and canine eosinophils. In cats, platelet counts showed a strong negative bias. Conclusions The overall performance of the poc H ‐100i V D iff was excellent with the noted limitations. The automated differential count can be used as screening tool in conjunction with evaluation of a blood smear.