纳特-赫里克技术与涂片法测定荷兰凤蝶白细胞的血液学参考区间及比较。

IF 0.6 4区 农林科学 Q3 VETERINARY SCIENCES
Marissa Rae Monopoli, David Sanchez-Migallon Guzman, Philip H Kass, Amir Kol
{"title":"纳特-赫里克技术与涂片法测定荷兰凤蝶白细胞的血液学参考区间及比较。","authors":"Marissa Rae Monopoli,&nbsp;David Sanchez-Migallon Guzman,&nbsp;Philip H Kass,&nbsp;Amir Kol","doi":"10.1647/21-00039","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Although cockatiels are among the most common avian species maintained as companion animals in the United States, information on standard hematologic reference values for this species is limited. The objectives of this study were to establish hematologic reference intervals (RI) for cockatiels, compare methods using both the Natt-Herrick technique (NHT) and the smear-based estimation technique (SBT), explore age and sex differences in the hematologic findings for this species, and produce the first cockatiel RI for fibrinogen concentration and thrombocyte estimate. Healthy cockatiels (60 males and 60 females, 2-11 years old) from a research colony were included in this study. Blood samples were placed in dipotassium ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid tubes, and erythrocyte counts and thrombocyte estimates were determined via automated analyzer (ADVIA 120) and SBT, respectively. Moreover, leukocyte concentrations were determined using both NHT and SBT to compare these common methods for measuring a complete blood count in cockatiels. Data were analyzed for outliers, distributions, descriptive statistics, and RI via Reference Value Adviser, a set of macroinstructions for Microsoft Excel (Microsoft, Redmond, WA, USA). Lymphocytes were the predominant leukocyte across both methods. According to the NHT, females had significantly higher concentrations of total leukocytes, heterophils, bands, lymphocytes, basophils, and total plasma protein compared with males. Significant inverse polynomial relationships were noted between total leukocyte count and age and lymphocyte counts and age for NHT. Total leukocyte count produced via NHT and SBT were compared using Passing-Bablok and Bland-Altman plots, and no significant constant or proportional biases were found. However, these methods showed wide limits of agreement. While the RI were interchangeable between methods from a clinical standpoint, the same method should be used to assess changes in an individual. The reported RI are uniquely robust given the sample size, balanced sex and age distributions, inclusion criteria, and control over sample collection.</p>","PeriodicalId":15102,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Avian Medicine and Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hematologic Reference Intervals and Comparison of Natt-Herrick Technique and Smear-Based Leukocyte Estimation in Cockatiels (<i>Nymphicus hollandicus</i>).\",\"authors\":\"Marissa Rae Monopoli,&nbsp;David Sanchez-Migallon Guzman,&nbsp;Philip H Kass,&nbsp;Amir Kol\",\"doi\":\"10.1647/21-00039\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Although cockatiels are among the most common avian species maintained as companion animals in the United States, information on standard hematologic reference values for this species is limited. The objectives of this study were to establish hematologic reference intervals (RI) for cockatiels, compare methods using both the Natt-Herrick technique (NHT) and the smear-based estimation technique (SBT), explore age and sex differences in the hematologic findings for this species, and produce the first cockatiel RI for fibrinogen concentration and thrombocyte estimate. Healthy cockatiels (60 males and 60 females, 2-11 years old) from a research colony were included in this study. Blood samples were placed in dipotassium ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid tubes, and erythrocyte counts and thrombocyte estimates were determined via automated analyzer (ADVIA 120) and SBT, respectively. Moreover, leukocyte concentrations were determined using both NHT and SBT to compare these common methods for measuring a complete blood count in cockatiels. Data were analyzed for outliers, distributions, descriptive statistics, and RI via Reference Value Adviser, a set of macroinstructions for Microsoft Excel (Microsoft, Redmond, WA, USA). Lymphocytes were the predominant leukocyte across both methods. According to the NHT, females had significantly higher concentrations of total leukocytes, heterophils, bands, lymphocytes, basophils, and total plasma protein compared with males. Significant inverse polynomial relationships were noted between total leukocyte count and age and lymphocyte counts and age for NHT. Total leukocyte count produced via NHT and SBT were compared using Passing-Bablok and Bland-Altman plots, and no significant constant or proportional biases were found. However, these methods showed wide limits of agreement. While the RI were interchangeable between methods from a clinical standpoint, the same method should be used to assess changes in an individual. The reported RI are uniquely robust given the sample size, balanced sex and age distributions, inclusion criteria, and control over sample collection.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15102,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Avian Medicine and Surgery\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Avian Medicine and Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1647/21-00039\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"VETERINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Avian Medicine and Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1647/21-00039","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

虽然鹦鹉是美国最常见的鸟类伴侣之一,但关于该物种的标准血液学参考值的信息有限。本研究的目的是建立cockatiel的血液学参考区间(RI),比较使用ntt - herrick技术(NHT)和基于涂片的估计技术(SBT)的方法,探索该物种血液学发现的年龄和性别差异,并产生第一个cockatiel纤维蛋白原浓度和血小板估计的RI。选取一个研究群体的健康鹦鹉(雄性和雌性各60只,年龄2-11岁)为研究对象。血样置于二钾乙二胺四乙酸管中,红细胞计数和血小板估计分别通过自动分析仪(ADVIA 120)和SBT测定。此外,白细胞浓度测定使用NHT和SBT来比较这些常见的方法测量全血细胞计数的鹦鹉。通过参考值顾问(Reference Value advisor)对数据进行异常值、分布、描述性统计和RI分析,参考值顾问是一组用于Microsoft Excel (Microsoft, Redmond, WA, USA)的宏指令。淋巴细胞是两种方法中主要的白细胞。根据NHT,与男性相比,女性的总白细胞、嗜异性粒细胞、条带、淋巴细胞、嗜碱性粒细胞和总血浆蛋白浓度明显更高。NHT患者白细胞总数与年龄、淋巴细胞计数与年龄之间存在显著的逆多项式关系。通过NHT和SBT产生的总白细胞计数使用pass - bablok和Bland-Altman图进行比较,没有发现显著的常数或比例偏差。然而,这些方法显示出广泛的一致限制。虽然从临床角度来看,RI是可互换的,但应该使用相同的方法来评估个体的变化。考虑到样本量、平衡的性别和年龄分布、纳入标准和对样本收集的控制,报告的RI具有独特的稳健性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Hematologic Reference Intervals and Comparison of Natt-Herrick Technique and Smear-Based Leukocyte Estimation in Cockatiels (Nymphicus hollandicus).

Although cockatiels are among the most common avian species maintained as companion animals in the United States, information on standard hematologic reference values for this species is limited. The objectives of this study were to establish hematologic reference intervals (RI) for cockatiels, compare methods using both the Natt-Herrick technique (NHT) and the smear-based estimation technique (SBT), explore age and sex differences in the hematologic findings for this species, and produce the first cockatiel RI for fibrinogen concentration and thrombocyte estimate. Healthy cockatiels (60 males and 60 females, 2-11 years old) from a research colony were included in this study. Blood samples were placed in dipotassium ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid tubes, and erythrocyte counts and thrombocyte estimates were determined via automated analyzer (ADVIA 120) and SBT, respectively. Moreover, leukocyte concentrations were determined using both NHT and SBT to compare these common methods for measuring a complete blood count in cockatiels. Data were analyzed for outliers, distributions, descriptive statistics, and RI via Reference Value Adviser, a set of macroinstructions for Microsoft Excel (Microsoft, Redmond, WA, USA). Lymphocytes were the predominant leukocyte across both methods. According to the NHT, females had significantly higher concentrations of total leukocytes, heterophils, bands, lymphocytes, basophils, and total plasma protein compared with males. Significant inverse polynomial relationships were noted between total leukocyte count and age and lymphocyte counts and age for NHT. Total leukocyte count produced via NHT and SBT were compared using Passing-Bablok and Bland-Altman plots, and no significant constant or proportional biases were found. However, these methods showed wide limits of agreement. While the RI were interchangeable between methods from a clinical standpoint, the same method should be used to assess changes in an individual. The reported RI are uniquely robust given the sample size, balanced sex and age distributions, inclusion criteria, and control over sample collection.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Avian Medicine and Surgery
Journal of Avian Medicine and Surgery 农林科学-兽医学
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
52
审稿时长
>36 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Avian Medicine and Surgery is an international journal of the medicine and surgery of both captive and wild birds. Published materials include scientific articles, case reports, editorials, abstracts, new research, and book reviews.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信