Gac F, Thibert JB, Le Berre C, Le Priol J, Semana G, Fest T, Roussel M. Evaluation of CytoDiff™ on cord blood WBC differential.
Int J Lab Hematol 2012;
35:46-54. [PMID:
22862853 DOI:
10.1111/j.1751-553x.2012.01460.x]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/20/2012] [Accepted: 06/21/2012] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION
An umbilical cord blood bank was recently opened in our institution as an alternative source of hematopoietic stem cells. Before inclusion of a cord blood in an international register, a WBC with differential is requested, among others. Currently, the reference method is the microscopic manual count, and we sought to evaluate the routine flow cytometric method (CytoDiff™) as an alternative.
METHODS
A total of 161 cord bloods were analyzed between November 2010 and February 2011. WBC differentials were determined for each sample, by (i) the cell counter (DxH800), (ii) a manual review, and (iii) the flow cytometry using the CytoDiff™ antibody cocktail.
RESULTS
Correlation coefficients between flow cytometry and microscopic count were satisfying for neutrophils, lymphocytes, and immature granulocytes and acceptable for eosinophils. On the other hand, we found lower correlation coefficient for basophils and monocytes. Monocytes' correlation was better when comparing flow cytometry with cell counter.
CONCLUSION
The flow cytometric approach is suitable to realize cord blood WBC differential and allows for the identification of additional cell subsets.
Collapse