Circulating Nucleated Red Blood Cells: An Updated Reference Interval.

Amy A Meredith, Neil R Meredith, Lynelle Smith, Julie Rosser
{"title":"Circulating Nucleated Red Blood Cells: An Updated Reference Interval.","authors":"Amy A Meredith, Neil R Meredith, Lynelle Smith, Julie Rosser","doi":"10.5858/arpa.2023-0328-OA","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context.—: </strong>Nucleated red blood cells (nRBCs) are not identified in the peripheral blood in healthy individuals beyond the neonatal period. Their presence in children and adults is traditionally considered pathologic. Contemporary hematology analyzers measure nRBCs at very low levels compared to traditional manual morphometric methods. The original launch of the Sysmex XN analyzer in this study's clinical laboratory verified the previously used nRBC reference interval of 0.00 to 0.01 × 106/μL. However, nRBC results from apparently healthy patients were flagged as abnormal (high), subsequently causing patient anxiety and increased subspecialty referrals.</p><p><strong>Objective.—: </strong>To determine whether current reference intervals (RIs) for nRBCs were clinically relevant.</p><p><strong>Design.—: </strong>We performed a prospective analysis of 405 300 specimens from nonhospitalized individuals who received a complete blood count. Applying inclusion/exclusion criteria produced a total specimen pool of 66 498.</p><p><strong>Results.—: </strong>Of the 66 498 samples with otherwise normal complete blood count results from healthy, nonhospitalized individuals, 338 showed results outside the previously established RI; 336 of 66 498 (0.5%) had nRBC results greater than 0.01 × 106/μL. Two samples had nRBC values greater than 0.10 ×106/μL.</p><p><strong>Conclusions.—: </strong>Based on statistical analysis of our results, we concluded that the upper limit of the RI could be updated from 0.01 × 106/μL to 0.10 × 106/μL. Increasing the upper limit of normal for the nRBC RI should decrease patient consternation from an abnormal laboratory value and significantly decrease costs through reducing unnecessary follow up care, and without causing patient harm.</p>","PeriodicalId":93883,"journal":{"name":"Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5858/arpa.2023-0328-OA","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Context.—: Nucleated red blood cells (nRBCs) are not identified in the peripheral blood in healthy individuals beyond the neonatal period. Their presence in children and adults is traditionally considered pathologic. Contemporary hematology analyzers measure nRBCs at very low levels compared to traditional manual morphometric methods. The original launch of the Sysmex XN analyzer in this study's clinical laboratory verified the previously used nRBC reference interval of 0.00 to 0.01 × 106/μL. However, nRBC results from apparently healthy patients were flagged as abnormal (high), subsequently causing patient anxiety and increased subspecialty referrals.

Objective.—: To determine whether current reference intervals (RIs) for nRBCs were clinically relevant.

Design.—: We performed a prospective analysis of 405 300 specimens from nonhospitalized individuals who received a complete blood count. Applying inclusion/exclusion criteria produced a total specimen pool of 66 498.

Results.—: Of the 66 498 samples with otherwise normal complete blood count results from healthy, nonhospitalized individuals, 338 showed results outside the previously established RI; 336 of 66 498 (0.5%) had nRBC results greater than 0.01 × 106/μL. Two samples had nRBC values greater than 0.10 ×106/μL.

Conclusions.—: Based on statistical analysis of our results, we concluded that the upper limit of the RI could be updated from 0.01 × 106/μL to 0.10 × 106/μL. Increasing the upper limit of normal for the nRBC RI should decrease patient consternation from an abnormal laboratory value and significantly decrease costs through reducing unnecessary follow up care, and without causing patient harm.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
循环有核红细胞:最新参考区间。
背景有核红细胞(nRBCs)在新生儿期以后的健康人外周血中就无法识别了。在儿童和成人中出现有核红细胞传统上被认为是病态的。与传统的人工形态测量方法相比,现代血液分析仪测量的 nRBC 含量非常低。本研究的临床实验室最初使用的 Sysmex XN 分析仪验证了以前使用的 nRBC 参考区间为 0.00 至 0.01 × 106/μL。然而,表面上健康的患者的 nRBC 结果却被标记为异常(偏高),从而引起了患者的焦虑和亚专科转诊的增加:确定目前 nRBC 的参考区间 (RI) 是否与临床相关:我们对 405 300 份接受全血细胞计数的非住院患者标本进行了前瞻性分析。根据纳入/排除标准,样本库中共有 66 498 份样本:在 66 498 份全血计数结果正常的健康非住院患者样本中,有 338 份样本的结果超出了之前确定的 RI;66 498 份样本中有 336 份样本(0.5%)的 nRBC 结果大于 0.01 × 106/μL。两个样本的 nRBC 值大于 0.10 ×106/μL :根据对结果的统计分析,我们得出结论:RI 的上限可从 0.01 × 106/μL 提高到 0.10 × 106/μL。提高 nRBC RI 的正常上限应能减少患者因实验室数值异常而产生的不安,并通过减少不必要的随访护理而显著降低成本,同时不会对患者造成伤害。
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 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Analytical and Clinical Validation of the Oncomine Dx Target Test to Assess HER2 Mutation Status in Tumor Tissue Samples From Patients With Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Treated With Trastuzumab Deruxtecan in the DESTINY-Lung01 and DESTINY-Lung02 Studies. Ethical and Regulatory Perspectives on Generative Artificial Intelligence in Pathology. Reduced Plasma Selenoprotein P Is Associated With Type I Antithrombin Deficiency and a Prothrombotic State. The Anatomic Pathology Hospitalist Model. Histologic Features of Liver Injury Associated With SARS-CoV-2 Messenger RNA Vaccines.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1