血小板聚集体计数在真性和假性血小板减少鉴别中的应用

目的 探讨血小板聚集体计数在真性和乙二胺四乙酸(EDTA)依赖性假性血小板减少(EDTA-PTCP)鉴别中的意义.方法 通过血细胞分析仪(简称仪器法)分析65份EDTA抗凝PLT减少标本(包括15份EDTA-PTCP标本及50份随机抽取的真性血小板减少标本)和50份PLT正常标本的血小板聚集体计数.通过更换柠檬酸盐抗凝剂和人工镜枪法(简称人工法)对仪器法检测PLT减少的标本进行PLT和血小板形态学复核,并比较分析真性和假性血小板减少在常规EDTA抗凝和柠檬酸盐抗凝2种情况下血小板聚集体计数的异同.结果 65份仪器法检测PLT减少的标本,PLT平均为(48±11)×109/L.其中50份真性血小板减少标本仪器法PLT平均为(48±10)×109/L,血小板聚集体计数为86±15;人工法PLT平均为(46±11)×109/L,镜检未发现血小板聚集现象;PLT在仪器法和人工法间差异无统计学意义(t=-1.26,P0.05).另外15份EDTA-FIEP标本,EDTA抗凝后仪器法PLT平均为(48±12)×109/L,血小板聚集体计数明显升高,平均为840±184;人工法PLT减少不明显,但血小板聚集明显,因此未能得到人工法PLT结果;采用柠檬酸盐抗凝后,仪器法PLT和人工法PLT均较前明显升高,分别为(141±13)×109/L和(134±17)×109/L,差异无统计学意义(t=-1.29,P0.05);血小板聚集体计数较前明显减少,平均为75±12,EDTA抗凝法与之比较差异有统计学意义(t=-6.82,P<0.001);镜下未见血小板聚集现象.结论 血小板聚集体计数有望成为监测血小板聚集的有用的临床指标,可用于判断由于血小板聚集引起的血细胞分析仪计数的假性血小板减少.

Clinical study of a novel platelet dumps count in differentiating true thrombocytopenia from pseudothrombocytopenia

Objective To study the clinical significance of a novel marker of platelet clumps count provided by hematology analyzer in differentiating true thrombocytopenia from EDTA-dependent pseudothrombocytopenia (EDTA-PTCP). Methods Samples from 65 cases of thrombocytopenia (including 15 EDTA-PCTP samples and 50 random samples of true thrombocytopenia) and 50 healthy controls were analyzed using hematology analyzers, and samples with low platelet counts were checked by replacing citric acid and using manual microscope observation to identify true thrombocytopenia from EDTA-PTCP. A novel marker of platelet clumps count was used to differentiate the two diseases for samples anficoagulated with EDTA or citric acid. Results In 65 patients with thrombocytopenia, platelet counts were (48±11)×109/L detected by automatic hematology analyzers. Fifty of 65 cases were true thrombocytopenia which showed low platelet counts [(48±10)×109/L by automated analyzer and (46±11)×109/L by manual assay]. No significance was observed between them (t=-1.26, P0.05). Platelet clumps counts were 86±15. No platelet clamps were detected under microscope. The other 15 cases were EDTA-PTCP [platelet counts were (48±12)×109/L and platelet clumps counts (840±184) were increased significantly by automated analyzer and using EDTA anticoagulant] which showed obviously platelet clumps and no less platelet counts under microscope. After replacing citric acid, platelet counts [(141±13)×109/L by automated analyzer and (134±17)×109/L by manual microscope assay] were increased significantly. No significance was observed between them (t=-1.29, P0.05). Platelet clumps counts (75±12) were decreased obviously compared with EDTA anticoagulant method (t=-6.82, P<0.001). No platelet clumps were detected under microscope. Conclusion Platelet clumps counts may be a useful clinical indicator for monitoring of platelet aggregates, especially for EDTA-PTCP caused by platelet clumping.