摘要
选新生入学体检血标本75例,另选门诊血常规检查的患者126例中单核细胞(MO)占15%~25%的血标本43例,分别进行白细胞人工镜检分类和全自动血细胞分析仪分类。新生入学体检标本人工分类和仪器分类的中性粒细胞(NE)、淋巴细胞(LY)和MO的百分率均无显著性差异(P>0.05);嗜酸性粒细胞(EO)和嗜碱性粒细胞(BA)两组比较有显著性差异(P<0.05)。MO百分率在15%~25%的标本人工分类和仪器分类的NE、EO和MO的百分率均无显著性差异(P>0.05),人工法测得的BA和LY百分率明显低于仪器法,两组比较有显著性差异(P<0.05)。以人工镜检为金标准,全自动血细胞分析仪的白细胞分类结果准确,但不能完全取代人工镜检,尤其对于异常标本,应把两种方法结合起来才能确保检测结果的可靠。
A total of 75 blood samples from newly enrolled students and 43cases in which the mononuclear cells accounted for 15%to 25%from 126 blood samples of outpatients with routine blood tests were selected.Neutrophil classification entrance examination specimens of artificial classification and instrument(NE)and lymphocyte(LY)showed no significant difference and the percentage of MO(P>0.05);Eosinophils(EO)and Eosinophil(BA)between the two groups had significant difference(P<0.05).There was no significant difference in the percentage of NE、EO and MO between the MO percentage of 15%to 25%specimens and the NE、EO and MO of the instrument classification.The percentage of BA and LY measured by manual method was significantly lower than that by the instrument method.There was a significant difference between the two groups(P<0.05).Taking artificial microscopy as the gold standard,the white blood cell classification results of the automatic blood cell analyzer are accurate,but they cannot completely replace artificial microscopy.Especially for abnormal specimens,the two methods should be combined to ensure the reliability of the test results.
作者
战伟
ZHAN Wei(Outpatient Department Laboratory of Dalian University,Dalian 116622,China)
出处
《大连大学学报》
2018年第3期62-66,共5页
Journal of Dalian University
关键词
白细胞分类
人工镜检
血细胞分析仪
显著性
Neutrophil classification
artificial microscopy
blood cell analyzer
significant
