Evaluation of the Use of a Platelet–Counting Tool in Plateletpheresis

Abstract

Objective: For years, blood transfusion centers in Taiwan have used the Quantitative Buffy Coat (QBC^®) Hematology System for platelet counts on capillary blood samples in the laboratory screening of apheresis donors. The system has not been evaluated for the prediction of yields in plateletpheresis. Methods : The QBC instrument was evaluated for reproducibility of platelet counts and compared with five electronic cell counters. We also collected both capillary and venous blood from voluntary donors before donation and counted platelets, comparing the QBC system and an electronic blood cell counter (Sysmex K1000). The correlation between donors’ predonation platelet counts and plateletpheresis yields was analyzed. Results: The R values for platelet counts between the QBC Hematology System and other electronic counters are lower (0.759–0.890) than among the electronic counters (0.929–0.973). The mean capillary platelet count and the mean venous platelet count were 241.9±50.3×10³/μl and 233.2 ±47.9×10³/μl by the QBC system, and 244.9±54.1×10³/μl and 218.9±46.5×10³/μl by the Sysmex K1000, respectively. Linear regression analysis showed that platelet yields correlated well with donors’ predonation platelet counts using the Sysmex K1000 counter (R = 0.777– 0.890, p<0.001), but not with the QBC system (R = 0.326∼0.755, p<0.05). Conclusion: The QBC Hematology System is not accurate enough to determine predonation platelet counts that are to be used for calculating the number of processing cycles for plateletpheresis.