Background: The MC-80 (Mindray, Shenzhen, China), a newly available artificial intelligence (AI)-based digital morphology analyzer, is the focus of this study. We aim to compare the leukocyte differential performance of the Mindray MC-80 with that of the Sysmex DI-60 and the gold standard, manual microscopy.
Methods: A total of 100 abnormal peripheral blood (PB) smears were compared across the MC-80, DI-60, and manual microscopy. Sensitivity, specificity, predictive value, and efficiency were calculated according to the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) EP12-A2 guidelines. Comparisons were made using Bland-Altman analysis and Passing-Bablok regression analysis. Additionally, within-run imprecision was evaluated using five samples, each with varying percentages of mature leukocytes and blasts, in accordance with CLSI EP05-A3 guidelines.
Results: The within-run coefficient of variation (%CV) of the MC-80 for most cell classes in the five samples was lower than that of the DI-60. Sensitivities for the MC-80 ranged from 98.2% for nucleated red blood cells (NRBC) to 28.6% for reactive lymphocytes. The DI-60's sensitivities varied between 100% for basophils and reactive lymphocytes, and 11.1% for metamyelocytes. Both analyzers demonstrated high specificity, negative predictive value, and efficiency, with over 90% for most cell classes. However, the DI-60 showed relatively lower specificity for lymphocytes (73.2%) and lower efficiency for blasts and lymphocytes (80.1% and 78.6%, respectively) compared with the MC-80. Bland-Altman analysis indicated that the absolute mean differences (%) ranged from 0.01 to 4.57 in MC-80 versus manual differential and 0.01 to 3.39 in DI-60 versus manual differential. After verification by technicians, both analyzers exhibited a very high correlation (r = 0.90-1.00) with the manual differential results in neutrophils, lymphocytes, and blasts.
Conclusions: The Mindray MC-80 demonstrated good performance for leukocyte differential in PB smears, notably exhibiting higher sensitivity for blasts identification than the DI-60.
Keywords: Mindray MC‐80; Sysmex DI‐60; digital morphology analyzer; performance.
© 2024 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.