Usefulness of thresholds for smear review of neutropenic samples analyzed with a Sysmex XN-10 analyzer.

Neutropenia is one of the main criteria for a blood smear review. The objective of this study was to compare the thresholds proposed by the international consensus group for hematology review (1.0 109/L) and the French speaking Group for Cellular Haematology (1.5 109/L) in terms of the number of useless smears. We collected 112,097 analyzed samples from four laboratories equipped with XN instruments (Sysmex, Kobe, Japan) during early 2016. The only exclusion criterion was a leucocyte count below 0.5 109/L. In the absence of abnormal cells and/or morphology suggesting haematological disease, samples were classified as 'negative for morphology' and the differential from the XN-10 was reported. These smear procedures were considered as uninformative. Some 2202 samples met the criterion for neutropenia (<1.5 109/L) for slide review representing 1.96% of the total. These included 1031 with neutropenia alone and 1171 neutropenia plus other abnormalities. Of the 1031 with neutropenia alone, 886 had a neutrophil count between 1.0 109/L and 1.5 109/L. The smear was uninformative for all of these samples. In conclusion, microscopic examination of a blood smear provided very limited information in cases of neutropenia without other abnormalities.

Evaluation and optimization of the extended information process unit (E-IPU) validation module integrating the sysmex flag systems and the recommendations of the French-speaking cellular hematology group (GFHC).

The French-Speaking Cellular Haematology Group (GFHC) recently published criteria for microscopic analysis of a blood smears when a hemogram is requested. In order to evaluate and improve these recommendations using an XN (Sysmex) analyzer, we assessed 31,836 samples categorized into two sub-groups of patients either receiving or not receiving care in the clinical hematology/oncology departments of two university hospitals. By combining the manufacturer's recommendations and the GFHC recommendations, 21.3% of samples had a positive review flag in phase 1 of our study (17,991 samples). In phase 2 (13,845 samples), increasing the immature granulocytes (IG) percentage from 5-10% as a review trigger threshold, and ignoring slides with isolated flags 'PLT HIGH' (thrombocytosis) or 'MCV LOW' (microcytosis) or 'Blast/Abn Lymph and Atypical Lymph' (blast cells/abnormal lymphocytes and atypical lymphocytes) (in the absence of abnormal cells on a previous blood smear within 72 h), enabled us to significantly reduce the number of slides reviewed from 21.3-15.0% (p < 0.0001), without loss of clinical value. This decrease occurred in both sub-groups (hematology 48.7-38.0%, non-hematology 18.3-11.7%, p < 0.0001). In conclusion, the application of the GFHC criteria adapted to XN analyzers has enabled us to optimize the hematology laboratory processes, and thus reduce the production costs and the turnaround time of hemogram results.