全自动血细胞分析仪与血涂片细胞形态联合用于血常规检验的临床研究

Clinical study of combined blood cell analyzer and blood smear cell morphology for routine blood tests

目的探讨检验科中全自动血细胞分析仪与血涂片细胞形态联合用于血常规检验的临床价值。方法选取本院2017年1月至2018年1月收治的150例行血常规检验患者作为研究对象,对所有研究对象采取全自动血细胞分析仪检测,对检测异常的进行血涂片细胞镜检,以两种检测方法的检验阳性率、细胞形态分类情况作为观察指标,对两种检验方法的临床价值进行对比分析。结果涂片镜检WBC、RBC及PLT镜检阳性率分别为99.20%、98.67%、98.32%,阳性率较高,而全自动血细胞分析仪分别为74.89%、65.64%、31.32%,两组比较差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05);使用全自动血细胞分析仪进行血常规检查发现,淋巴细胞、单核细胞、中性粒细胞、嗜酸性粒细胞、嗜碱性粒细胞的γ值分别为0.965、0.923、0.887、0.864、0.542,而血涂片镜检分别为0.959、0.932、0.893、0.854、0.889,两种检验方法淋巴细胞、单核细胞、中性粒细胞、嗜酸性粒细胞γ值比较差异无统计学意义,但全自动血细胞检测仪嗜碱性粒细胞γ值低于血涂片镜检,两种检验方法比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论全自动血细胞分析仪在检验科血常规检验中的临床价值较高,但对于细胞形态的区分还存在一定的缺陷,而联合血涂片镜检则可以很好的弥补这一缺点,可提高检查结果的可靠性,对于患者疾病的诊断具有重要意义,值得临床推广。

Objective To explore the clinical value of the combination of automatic blood cell analyzer and blood smear cell morphology in routine blood tests in the laboratory. Methods 150 patients who received routine blood tests in our hospital from January 2017 to January 2018 were selected as the research subjects. All the subjects were tested with fully automatic blood cell analyzer, and blood smear cytoscopy tests were performed for abnormal detection. The positive rate and classification of cell morphology of the two methods were used as observation indicators, and the clinical value of the two methods was compared and analyzed. Results The positive rates of WBC, RBC, and PLT microscopy were 99.20%, 98.67%, and 98.32%, respectively.The positive rates were higher, while the automatic blood cell analyzers were 74.89%, 65.64%, and 31.32%, respectively. The difference was statistically significant(P<0.05). γ values of lymphocytes, monocytes, neutrophils, eosinophils, and basophils were found in routine blood tests using an automatic blood cell analyzer were 0.965, 0.923, 0.887, 0.864, 0.542, and blood smear microscopy were 0.959, 0.932, 0.893, 0.854, 0.889, respectively. The two test methods are used in lymphocytes, monocytes, neutrophils, and eosinophils. The difference in γ value was not statistically significant, but the γ value of basophils in the automatic blood cell tester was lower than that in blood smear microscopy. The difference was statistically significant between the two test methods(P<0.05). Conclusion The automatic blood cell analyzer has a high clinical value in routine blood tests, but there are still some defects in the differentiation of cell morphology. Combined blood smear microscopy can make up for this shortcoming and improve the examination. The reliability of the results is of great significance for the diagnosis of patients’ diseases and is worthy of clinical promotion.