A-130 Evaluation of the potential benefits of reticulocytes integrated in the CBC routine on sthemA 801 analyzer

IF 6.3 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY
Joffrey Feriel, Sylvain Barreau, Marie Gapihan
{"title":"A-130 Evaluation of the potential benefits of reticulocytes integrated in the CBC routine on sthemA 801 analyzer","authors":"Joffrey Feriel, Sylvain Barreau, Marie Gapihan","doi":"10.1093/clinchem/hvaf086.126","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background Reticulocyte (RET) count is a key parameter to assess the bone marrow’s ability to produce red blood cells (RBC) in response to physiological challenges. While not mandatory part of the complete blood count, clinicians can request this test as needed. Laboratory can also add it as reflex testing based on hemoglobin (HGB) levels for example. This study aimed to evaluate the medical value of systematically performing reticulocyte counts alongside complete blood counts (CBC) on all samples enabled by the sthemA 801 analyzer. Methods We randomly collected 1004 samples in a French center over a 2-month period. The sthemA 801 was used as a reference for data collection and statistical analysis. We identified the number and percentage of samples for which RET was requested by clinicians, those without prescription and RET >150 G/L (a commonly accepted threshold for reticulocytosis) and those with in addition HGB =10 g/dL (the threshold proposed by the French Group of Cellular Hematology (GFHC) for RET reflex testing). A chi-square test was used to define whether the notion of prescription and HGB levels had an impact on the percentage of positive RETs. Finally, we reviewed medical records of samples with incidental findings of RET > 150 G/L associated with HGB = 10 g/dL to identify the most likely causes of reticulocytosis. Results Among the 1004 samples included in the study, 74 (7.4%) had a prescription for RET and 123 (12.3%) had a RET > 150 G/L. Prescription status did not affect the percentage of positive RET (p=0.2058) and 89.4% (110/123) of samples with reticulocytosis went missed. HGB levels had a significant impact on the percentage of positive RET identified (p<0.0001). Using an HGB threshold of 10 g/dL allowed the detection of 69.1% (76/110) of samples with positive RET. Finally, 34 samples with RET > 150 G/L remained undetected. Among them, 12 were related to road traffic accident or postoperative bleeding, 9 were multifactorial (resolution of inflammation or immunosuppressants combined with another cause), 4 involved iron supplementation for iron deficiency anemia, and 2 had a known constitutional RBC disorder (one sickle cell disease and one hereditary spherocytosis). The absence of clinical data for three patients prevented a definitive conclusion. Interestingly, one patient had compensated hemolysis of undetermined cause. She was a 46-year-old woman who had been followed for more than 20 years and had multiple comorbidities, but none of them could explain the chronic compensated hemolysis. An inherited RBC disorder was suspected and will be further explored. Conclusion We found that over 3% of samples with RET > 150 G/L might go unnoticed in daily hospital practice, despite clinicians having the option to request them and the use of GFHC expertise rules in the laboratory. Reticulocytes being part of the CBC routine on sthemA801 analyzer could benefit patients receiving iron supplementation or erythropoietin therapy as well as those with persistent inflammation, by closely monitoring the resolution of anemia. Additionally, it could facilitate earlier diagnosis of immune or constitutional compensated hemolysis and subacute hemorrhages.","PeriodicalId":10690,"journal":{"name":"Clinical chemistry","volume":"75 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical chemistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/clinchem/hvaf086.126","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background Reticulocyte (RET) count is a key parameter to assess the bone marrow’s ability to produce red blood cells (RBC) in response to physiological challenges. While not mandatory part of the complete blood count, clinicians can request this test as needed. Laboratory can also add it as reflex testing based on hemoglobin (HGB) levels for example. This study aimed to evaluate the medical value of systematically performing reticulocyte counts alongside complete blood counts (CBC) on all samples enabled by the sthemA 801 analyzer. Methods We randomly collected 1004 samples in a French center over a 2-month period. The sthemA 801 was used as a reference for data collection and statistical analysis. We identified the number and percentage of samples for which RET was requested by clinicians, those without prescription and RET >150 G/L (a commonly accepted threshold for reticulocytosis) and those with in addition HGB =10 g/dL (the threshold proposed by the French Group of Cellular Hematology (GFHC) for RET reflex testing). A chi-square test was used to define whether the notion of prescription and HGB levels had an impact on the percentage of positive RETs. Finally, we reviewed medical records of samples with incidental findings of RET > 150 G/L associated with HGB = 10 g/dL to identify the most likely causes of reticulocytosis. Results Among the 1004 samples included in the study, 74 (7.4%) had a prescription for RET and 123 (12.3%) had a RET > 150 G/L. Prescription status did not affect the percentage of positive RET (p=0.2058) and 89.4% (110/123) of samples with reticulocytosis went missed. HGB levels had a significant impact on the percentage of positive RET identified (p<0.0001). Using an HGB threshold of 10 g/dL allowed the detection of 69.1% (76/110) of samples with positive RET. Finally, 34 samples with RET > 150 G/L remained undetected. Among them, 12 were related to road traffic accident or postoperative bleeding, 9 were multifactorial (resolution of inflammation or immunosuppressants combined with another cause), 4 involved iron supplementation for iron deficiency anemia, and 2 had a known constitutional RBC disorder (one sickle cell disease and one hereditary spherocytosis). The absence of clinical data for three patients prevented a definitive conclusion. Interestingly, one patient had compensated hemolysis of undetermined cause. She was a 46-year-old woman who had been followed for more than 20 years and had multiple comorbidities, but none of them could explain the chronic compensated hemolysis. An inherited RBC disorder was suspected and will be further explored. Conclusion We found that over 3% of samples with RET > 150 G/L might go unnoticed in daily hospital practice, despite clinicians having the option to request them and the use of GFHC expertise rules in the laboratory. Reticulocytes being part of the CBC routine on sthemA801 analyzer could benefit patients receiving iron supplementation or erythropoietin therapy as well as those with persistent inflammation, by closely monitoring the resolution of anemia. Additionally, it could facilitate earlier diagnosis of immune or constitutional compensated hemolysis and subacute hemorrhages.
A-130在sthema801分析仪上评价网织红细胞整合到CBC常规的潜在益处
背景网织红细胞(RET)计数是评估骨髓在应对生理挑战时产生红细胞(RBC)能力的关键参数。虽然不是全血细胞计数的强制性部分,但临床医生可以根据需要要求进行这项测试。实验室也可以添加它作为反射测试基于血红蛋白(HGB)水平。本研究旨在评估sthemA 801分析仪对所有样品进行网织红细胞计数和全血细胞计数(CBC)的系统执行的医学价值。方法在法国某中心随机抽取1004份样本,为期2个月。参照sthema801进行数据收集和统计分析。我们确定了临床医生要求进行RET的样本的数量和百分比,那些没有处方的样本和RET &;gt;150 G/L(网织红细胞缺乏症的普遍接受阈值)和额外HGB =10 G/ dL(法国细胞血液学小组(GFHC)为RET反射测试提出的阈值)的患者。使用卡方检验来确定处方和HGB水平的概念是否对ret阳性百分比有影响。最后,我们回顾了偶然发现RET &;gt;150 G/L与HGB相关= 10 G/ dL以确定网织红细胞增多症的最可能原因。结果纳入研究的1004份样本中,74份(7.4%)有RET处方,123份(12.3%)有RET处方;150 G / L。处方状态不影响RET阳性百分比(p=0.2058), 89.4%(110/123)的网状细胞缺检。HGB水平对确定的RET阳性百分比有显著影响(p<0.0001)。使用10 g/dL的HGB阈值可以检测出69.1%(76/110)的RET阳性样品。150g /L未检测到。其中12例与道路交通事故或术后出血有关,9例为多因素(炎症消退或免疫抑制剂联合其他原因),4例涉及缺铁性贫血的补铁,2例已知的构造性红细胞疾病(1例镰状细胞病和1例遗传性球形红细胞增多症)。由于缺乏三名患者的临床资料,无法得出明确的结论。有趣的是,一名患者出现了原因不明的代偿性溶血。她是一名46岁的女性,随访了20多年,有多种合并症,但没有一种可以解释慢性代偿性溶血。我们怀疑这是一种遗传性红细胞疾病,我们将进一步探讨。结论:我们发现超过3%的RET样本150 G/L可能在日常医院实践中被忽视,尽管临床医生可以选择要求他们,并在实验室使用GFHC专业知识规则。网状红细胞作为sthemA801分析仪CBC常规的一部分,通过密切监测贫血的消退,可以使接受补铁或促红细胞生成素治疗的患者以及持续性炎症患者受益。此外,它可以促进免疫或体质代偿性溶血和亚急性出血的早期诊断。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Clinical chemistry
Clinical chemistry 医学-医学实验技术
CiteScore
11.30
自引率
4.30%
发文量
212
审稿时长
1.7 months
期刊介绍: Clinical Chemistry is a peer-reviewed scientific journal that is the premier publication for the science and practice of clinical laboratory medicine. It was established in 1955 and is associated with the Association for Diagnostics & Laboratory Medicine (ADLM). The journal focuses on laboratory diagnosis and management of patients, and has expanded to include other clinical laboratory disciplines such as genomics, hematology, microbiology, and toxicology. It also publishes articles relevant to clinical specialties including cardiology, endocrinology, gastroenterology, genetics, immunology, infectious diseases, maternal-fetal medicine, neurology, nutrition, oncology, and pediatrics. In addition to original research, editorials, and reviews, Clinical Chemistry features recurring sections such as clinical case studies, perspectives, podcasts, and Q&A articles. It has the highest impact factor among journals of clinical chemistry, laboratory medicine, pathology, analytical chemistry, transfusion medicine, and clinical microbiology. The journal is indexed in databases such as MEDLINE and Web of Science.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信