Differential white blood cell counts in rabbits: a comparison of the Advia 2120 and a manual method

We evaluated the performance of the Advia 2120 (Siemens) differential leukocyte count (A-Diff) compared to the manual method (M-Diff) in rabbits. EDTA-anticoagulated blood samples collected for diagnostic purposes were analyzed within 6 h of collection. The M-Diff was performed blindly by 2 observers on blood smears by counting 200 cells. We initially included 117 samples; 25 samples were excluded because of suboptimal gating of leukocytes in the Advia peroxidase cytogram or poor blood smear quality. The correlation between the A-Diff and M-Diff was very high for heterophils (r = 0.924, p < 0.001) and lymphocytes (r = 0.903, p < 0.001), high for basophils (r = 0.823, p < 0.001), moderate for monocytes (r = 0.645, p < 0.001), and low for eosinophils (r = 0.336, p = 0.001). The Passing–Bablok regression analyses revealed a small-to-moderate constant error for lymphocytes and a slight constant error for basophils. Small proportional errors were detected for heterophils, lymphocytes, and eosinophils. The Bland–Altman analyses revealed that the Advia significantly underestimates heterophils and overestimates lymphocytes compared to M-Diff. The biases for the other leukocytes were minimal and likely clinical insignificant; however, our results, particularly for eosinophils, should be interpreted cautiously given the observed low percentages in our samples. Given the observed biases in heterophil and lymphocyte percentages in the Advia 2120 CBC results in rabbits, method-specific reference intervals should be used. The Advia can recognize leporine basophils. Evaluation of blood smears is still recommended to investigate abnormal results and erroneous cytograms reported by the Advia.     

Biological and environmental factors associated with the detection of elephant endotheliotropic herpesvirus in Asian elephants (Elephas maximus) in Thailand

Elephant endotheliotropic herpesvirus (EEHV) infection is one of the most common diseases in young elephants, causing severe fatal hemorrhagic disease. Subclinical infection was previously described; however, information about the factors associated with virus shedding and reactivation were scarce. To identify the biological and environmental factors related with EEHV detection, blood and oral swab samples were collected from nine captive Asian elephants in Thailand for one year and tested for EEHV presence using real-time PCR. Data including hematological values, management, environmental temperature, and serum cortisol levels were also recorded and analyzed. Results showed that the viral detection frequency ranged from 0–25%. The highest detection frequency was found in the two youngest elephants, aged less than 15 years. Three types of viruses, EEHV1, EEHV4, and EEHV5, were found in this study, which also detected mixed infection in five elephants. Additionally, the study found that sample type, changes in hematological values, management and health issues, and serum cortisol levels were not associated with herpesvirus detection in the elephants. However, EEHV detection percentage was significantly increased in the summer (mid-Feb to mid-May), possibly due to body fitness reduction from food source limitation and low nutrient content. To obtain a broad aspect of EEHV management, long-term EEHV monitoring is highly recommended in every captive elephant herd.     

Comparison of white blood cell differential percentages determined by the in-house LaserCyte hematology analyzer and a manual method

BACKGROUND: The LaserCyte hematology analyzer (IDEXX Laboratories, Chalfont St. Peter, Bucks, UK) is the first in-house laser-based single channel flow cytometer designed specifically for veterinary practice. The instrument provides a full hematologic analysis including a 5-part WBC differential (LC-diff%). We are unaware of published studies comparing LC-diff% results to those determined by other methods used in practice. OBJECTIVE: To compare LC-diff% results to those obtained by a manual differential cell count (M-diff%). METHODS: Eighty-six venous blood samples from 44 dogs and 42 cats were collected into EDTA tubes at the Forest Veterinary Centre (Epping, UK). Samples were analyzed using the LaserCyte within 1 hour of collection. Unstained blood smears were then posted to Langford Veterinary Diagnostics, University of Bristol, and stained with modified Wright's stain. One hundred-cell manual differential counts were performed by 2 technicians and the mean percentage was calculated for each cell type. Data (LC-diff% vs M-diff%) were analyzed using Wilcoxon signed rank tests, Deming regression, and Bland-Altman difference plots. RESULTS: Significant differences between methods were found for neutrophil and monocyte percentages in samples from dogs and cats and for eosinophil percentage in samples from cats. Correlations (r) (canine/feline) were .55/.72 for neutrophils, .76/.69 for lymphocytes, .05/.29 for monocytes and .60/.82 for eosinophils. Agreement between LC-diff% and Mdiff% results was poor in samples from both species. Bland-Altman plots revealed outliers in samples with atypical WBCs (1 cat), leukocytosis (2 dogs, 9 cats), and leukopenia (16 dogs, 11 cats). The LaserCyte generated error flags in 28 of 86 (32.6%) samples, included 7 with leukopenia, 8 with lymphopenia, 7 with leukocytosis, 1 with anemia, and 1 with erythrocytosis. When results from these 28 samples were excluded, correlations from the remaining nonflagged results (canine/feline) were .63/.65 for neutrophils, .67/.65 for lymphocytes, .11/.33 for monocytes, and .63/.82 for eosinophils. CONCLUSION: Although use of a 100-cell (vs 200-cell) M-diff% may be a limitation of our study, good correlation between WBC differentials obtained using the LaserCyte and the manual method was achieved only for feline eosinophils.     

Canine complete blood counts: a comparison of four in‐office instruments with the ADVIA 120 and manual differential counts

Background: With more use of bench‐top in‐office hematology analyzers, the accuracy of reported values is increasingly important. Instruments use varied methods for cell counting and differentiation, and blood smears may not always be examined. Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare canine CBC results using 4 bench‐top instruments (Hemavet 950, Heska CBC‐Diff, IDEXX LaserCyte, and IDEXX VetAutoread) with ADVIA 120 and manual leukocyte counts. Methods: EDTA‐anticoagulated canine blood samples (n=100) were analyzed on each instrument. Manual differentials were based on 100‐cell counts. Linear regression, difference plots, paired t‐tests, and estimation of diagnostic equivalence were used to analyze results. Results: Correlations of HCT, WBC, and platelet counts were very good to excellent between all in‐office instruments and the ADVIA 120, but results varied in accuracy (comparability). Hemavet 950 and Heska CBC‐Diff results compared best with ADVIA results and manual leukocyte differentials. HCT and platelet counts on the IDEXX VetAutoread compared well with those from the ADVIA. Except for neutrophil counts, leukocyte differentials from all instruments compared poorly with ADVIA and manual counts. Reticulocyte counts on the LaserCyte and VetAutoread compared poorly with those from the ADVIA. Conclusions: The Hemavet 950 and Heska CBC‐Diff performed best of the 4 analyzers we compared. HCT, WBC, and platelet counts on the LaserCyte had minimally sufficient comparability for diagnostic use. Except for neutrophils (granulocytes), leukocyte differential counts were unreliable on all in‐office analyzers. Instruments with a 5‐part leukocyte differential provided no added benefit over a 3‐part differential. Assessment of erythrocyte regeneration on the LaserCyte and VetAutoread was unreliable compared with the ADVIA 120.     

牛膝多糖对脂多糖免疫应激仔猪血液生化指标和白细胞分类计数的影响

试验旨在探讨牛膝多糖(ABPS)对脂多糖(LPS)刺激的断奶仔猪血液生化指标和白细胞分类计数的影响。选用48头(28±3)d、体重(8.45±0.14)kg的杜洛克×长白×大白断奶仔猪,采用2×2因子设计,两个因子分别为不同日粮处理(0或500mg/kgABPS)和免疫应激(注射LPS或生理盐水)。试验期28d。在第14天和第21天,每日粮组的一半猪注射100μg/kgBW的LPS,另一半注射生理盐水作对照。注射后3h,采血测定血液生化指标,并进行白细胞分类计数。结果表明:LPS刺激提高了第14天和第21天血清中碱性磷酸酶、谷草转氨酶(GOT)的活性及谷草转氨酶与谷丙转氨酶的比值(P0.05),并降低了第21天血清总蛋白和白蛋白的含量(P0.05);ABPS提高了第14天血清总蛋白和球蛋白的含量(P0.05)。在第14天,LPS刺激降低了白细胞、淋巴细胞、单核细胞和中性粒细胞的含量及单核细胞比例(P0.001)。在第21天,LPS刺激降低了白细胞、淋巴细胞的含量及比例,而提高了中性粒细胞比例(P0.001)。ABPS提高了白细胞(14d:P0.10)和中性粒细胞(14d:P0.05;21d:P0.05)的含量及中性粒细胞比例(14d:P0.05;21d:P0.10),降低了淋巴细胞比例(14d:P0.05;21d:P0.10)。结果提示,LPS可引起仔猪血液生化指标和白细胞分类计数发生显著变化,ABPS在一定程度可缓解上述现象,表现出一定的改善免疫和缓解炎症的作用。