Laboratory hematology : official publication of the International Society for Laboratory Hematology
-
Comparative Study
Comparison of neutrophil CD64 expression, manual myeloid immaturity counts, and automated hematology analyzer flags as indicators of infection or sepsis.
There is a clear need for improved indicators of infection or sepsis to increase the sensitivity and specificity of both diagnosis and therapeutic monitoring. One of the effects of inflammatory cytokines on the innate immune response is the rapid up-regulation of CD64 expression on the neutrophil membrane. We and others have hypothesized that the measurement of neutrophil CD64 expression might represent an improved diagnostic indicator of infection and sepsis. ⋯ Neutrophil CD64 expression demonstrated a superior sensitivity (94.1%), specificity (84.9%), and positive predictive likelihood ratio (6.24), compared with neutrophil counts (sensitivity, 79.4%; specificity, 46.8%; positive predictive likelihood ratio, 1.49), band counts (sensitivity, 87.5%; specificity, 43.5%; positive predictive likelihood ratio, 1.55), myeloid immaturity fraction (sensitivity, 94.6%; specificity, 84.5%; positive predictive likelihood ratio, 2.12), and flagging on an automated hematology analyzer (sensitivity, 94.1%; specificity, 40.5%; positive predictive likelihood ratio, 1.58). Relative to the other laboratory parameters, the neutrophil CD64 parameter also provided the best separation of the 4 clinical groups. The findings indicate that neutrophil CD64 expression as determined by quantitative flow cytometry is an improved diagnostic indicator of infection/sepsis relative to current laboratory indicators of relative or absolute myeloid cell counts or hematology analyzer flagging algorithms.
-
This study compared the white blood cell (WBC) and red blood cell (RBC) counts obtained with the Cell-Dyn 3200 (CD 3200) with results obtained by hemocytometer, the reference method for counting cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and other body fluid specimens. Ninety-six CSF and 65 body fluid specimens were evaluated. Background counts were maintained on the CD 3200 at 0.001 x 10(9)/L and 0.00 x 10(12)/L for WBC and RBC counts, respectively. ⋯ In contrast to the only other instrument with comparable reportable ranges, the CD 3200 requires a smaller sample volume without any special sample preparation, reagents, or software. By using the CD 3200 with our laboratory-specific rules for agreement between duplicate counts, we would be able to reduce our manual CSF specimen counts from 192 TNC and 192 RBC counts to 2 TNC and 178 RBC counts. For body fluid specimens, our manual counts would be reduced from 130 TNC and 130 RBC counts to 10 TNC and 4 RBC counts.