ArticleAsian journal of transfusion science
Comparative study of quality of leukoreduced packed red blood cell units as assessed by nageotte hemocytometry and flow cytometry.
Article in Asian journal of transfusion science. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of pre-storage leukoreduction on erythrocyte concentrates and performance of newer generation leuko-filters at a tertiary care oncology hospital in Western India.African journal of laboratory medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAssessment of residual white blood cell (rWBC) count is vital to ascertain the quality of leukodepleted (LD) blood components. Automated cell analyzers lack the sensitivity for the assessment of very few leukocytes as found in LD blood components. Flow Cytometry (FC) based methods and Nageotte hemocytometer are the most commonly used techniques for this purpose. The objective of this study was to compare the use of Nageotte hemocytometer and FC for quality control of LD red blood cell units. MATERIALS AND
methodsA prospective, observational study was conducted in the Department of Immunohematology and Blood Transfusion of a tertiary care center from September 2018 to September 2020. About 303 LD-packed red blood cell units were tested by FC and Nageotte hemocytometer for rWBCs.
resultsThe number of rWBC (mean) detected by flow cytometer and Nageotte's hemocytometer was 1.06 ± 0.43 white blood cell (WBC)/μL and 0.67 ± 0.39 WBC/μL, respectively. Coefficient of variation was 58.37% by Nageotte hemocytometer method and 40.46% by FC. Linear regression analysis did not show any correlation (R
conclusionFlow cytometric technique provides a more precise and accurate objective tool compared to Nageotte hemocytometer which is labor intensive, time consuming, and prone to errors arising out of subjectivity along with reported underestimation bias. In the absence of adequate infrastructure, resources, and trained workforce, Nageotte hemocytometer method is a reliable alternative. Nageotte's chamber could be best used in the resource-constrained setup as it offers a relatively inexpensive, simple, and viable means to enumerate rWBCs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.