Tatiana C Weisbrod, Ramiro Isaza, Carolyn Cray, Laurie Adler, Nicole I Stacy
{"title":"人工白细胞差异计数和血小板估计在大象血液学中的重要性:血片回顾是必不可少的。","authors":"Tatiana C Weisbrod, Ramiro Isaza, Carolyn Cray, Laurie Adler, Nicole I Stacy","doi":"10.1080/01652176.2020.1867329","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Unique features of elephant hematology are known challenges in analytical methodology like two types of monocytes typical for members of the Order Afrotheria and platelet counts of the comparatively small elephant platelet. To investigate WBC differential and platelet data generated by an impedance-based hematology analyzer without availability of validated species-specific software for recognition of elephant WBCs and platelets, compared to manual blood film review. Blood samples preserved in ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) of 50 elephants (n = 35 <i>Elephas maximus</i> and n = 15 <i>Loxodonta africana</i>) were used. A Mann-Whitney test for independent samples was used to compare parameters between methods and agreement was tested using Bland-Altman bias plots. All hematological variables, including absolute numbers of heterophils, lymphocytes, monocytes, eosinophils, basophils, and platelets, were significantly different (<i>p</i> < 0.0001) between both methods of analysis, and there was no agreement using Bland-Altman bias plots. Manual review consistently produced higher heterophil and monocyte counts as well as platelet estimates, while the automated analyzer produced higher lymphocyte, eosinophil, and basophil counts. The hematology analyzer did not properly differentiate elephant lymphocytes and monocytes, and did not accurately count elephant platelets. These findings emphasize the importance of manual blood film review as part of elephant complete blood counts in both clinical and research settings and as a basis for the development of hematological reference intervals.</p>","PeriodicalId":51207,"journal":{"name":"Veterinary Quarterly","volume":"41 1","pages":"30-35"},"PeriodicalIF":7.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/01652176.2020.1867329","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The importance of manual white blood cell differential counts and platelet estimates in elephant hematology: blood film review is essential.\",\"authors\":\"Tatiana C Weisbrod, Ramiro Isaza, Carolyn Cray, Laurie Adler, Nicole I Stacy\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/01652176.2020.1867329\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Unique features of elephant hematology are known challenges in analytical methodology like two types of monocytes typical for members of the Order Afrotheria and platelet counts of the comparatively small elephant platelet. To investigate WBC differential and platelet data generated by an impedance-based hematology analyzer without availability of validated species-specific software for recognition of elephant WBCs and platelets, compared to manual blood film review. Blood samples preserved in ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) of 50 elephants (n = 35 <i>Elephas maximus</i> and n = 15 <i>Loxodonta africana</i>) were used. A Mann-Whitney test for independent samples was used to compare parameters between methods and agreement was tested using Bland-Altman bias plots. All hematological variables, including absolute numbers of heterophils, lymphocytes, monocytes, eosinophils, basophils, and platelets, were significantly different (<i>p</i> < 0.0001) between both methods of analysis, and there was no agreement using Bland-Altman bias plots. Manual review consistently produced higher heterophil and monocyte counts as well as platelet estimates, while the automated analyzer produced higher lymphocyte, eosinophil, and basophil counts. The hematology analyzer did not properly differentiate elephant lymphocytes and monocytes, and did not accurately count elephant platelets. These findings emphasize the importance of manual blood film review as part of elephant complete blood counts in both clinical and research settings and as a basis for the development of hematological reference intervals.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51207,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Veterinary Quarterly\",\"volume\":\"41 1\",\"pages\":\"30-35\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/01652176.2020.1867329\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Veterinary Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/01652176.2020.1867329\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"VETERINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Veterinary Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01652176.2020.1867329","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
The importance of manual white blood cell differential counts and platelet estimates in elephant hematology: blood film review is essential.
Unique features of elephant hematology are known challenges in analytical methodology like two types of monocytes typical for members of the Order Afrotheria and platelet counts of the comparatively small elephant platelet. To investigate WBC differential and platelet data generated by an impedance-based hematology analyzer without availability of validated species-specific software for recognition of elephant WBCs and platelets, compared to manual blood film review. Blood samples preserved in ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) of 50 elephants (n = 35 Elephas maximus and n = 15 Loxodonta africana) were used. A Mann-Whitney test for independent samples was used to compare parameters between methods and agreement was tested using Bland-Altman bias plots. All hematological variables, including absolute numbers of heterophils, lymphocytes, monocytes, eosinophils, basophils, and platelets, were significantly different (p < 0.0001) between both methods of analysis, and there was no agreement using Bland-Altman bias plots. Manual review consistently produced higher heterophil and monocyte counts as well as platelet estimates, while the automated analyzer produced higher lymphocyte, eosinophil, and basophil counts. The hematology analyzer did not properly differentiate elephant lymphocytes and monocytes, and did not accurately count elephant platelets. These findings emphasize the importance of manual blood film review as part of elephant complete blood counts in both clinical and research settings and as a basis for the development of hematological reference intervals.
期刊介绍:
Veterinary Quarterly is an international open access journal which publishes high quality review articles and original research in the field of veterinary science and animal diseases. The journal publishes research on a range of different animal species and topics including: - Economically important species such as domesticated and non-domesticated farm animals, including avian and poultry diseases; - Companion animals (dogs, cats, horses, pocket pets and exotics); - Wildlife species; - Infectious diseases; - Diagnosis; - Treatment including pharmacology and vaccination