ArticleJournal of clinical laboratory analysis2024
Evaluation of the Sysmex XQ-320 three-part differential haematology analyser and its flagging capabilities.
Article in Journal of clinical laboratory analysis, 2024. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of the Sysmex XQ-320 three-part differential haematology analyser and its flagging capabilities.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThree-part differential (3PD) haematology analysers offer a quick, easy-to-use and economical way to acquire important information about a patient's physiology. In this study, we evaluated a new 3PD analyser, the Sysmex XQ-320, investigated its comparability with its predecessor (Sysmex XP-300) and the five-part differential analyser Sysmex XN-9000, and explored its flagging potential.
methodsAnalytical performance studies were conducted for repeatability, within-laboratory precision, between-day precision, carry-over and linearity with fresh blood and QC material. Method comparison was performed in 493 samples comparing XQ-320 with XP-300, using the XN-9000 as the gold standard.
resultsThe XQ-320 excelled manufacturer's specifications in the analytical performance studies, except for MXD in within-laboratory and between-day precisions using the QC material level 1. The XQ-320 showed correlation values greater than 0.94 with XN-9000 for the majority of the 20 reportable parameters (MXD# 0.891, MXD% 0.898 and MCHC 0.849). Improvements over the XP-300 were observed in WBC in the leucocytopenic range (bias -0.038 vs. -0.097) and PLT (bias 2.568 vs. -7.877, intercept 3.880 vs. -8.845). Concordance between XQ-320 and XP-300 was 91.9% for the WBC histogram abnormal distribution flag and 95.3% for the PLT flag. Patterns of increased neutrophils and decreased mixed cells on the XQ-320 were observed in samples that raised a flag on XN-9000.
conclusionThe XQ-320 showed excellent analytical performance, and very good to excellent correlation with XN-9000 with improvements over XP-300. Flagging combined with parameter patterns identified additional suspected abnormal samples, thus making the XQ-320 an excellent solution for laboratories utilising 3PD analysers.
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.