全自动法不同模式检测血小板的比较分析  

Comparative analysis of different models of fully automatic method for detecting platelet

作　　者：褚静英[1] 徐廷云[1] 陆玉霞[1] 羽晓瑜[1] 

机构地区：[1]苏州卫生职业技术学院检验药学系,215009

出　　处：《检验医学与临床》2011年第4期432-433,共2页Laboratory Medicine and Clinic

摘　　要：目的比较全自动法预稀释模式与全自动法闭盖全血模式检测血小板结果的准确性。方法健康人静脉血标本分别用全自动法预稀释模式与全自动法闭盖全血模式进行血小板检测。结果同一份标本不同模式比较:全自动法预稀释模式血小板计数结果为(188.44±50.15)×109/L,全自动法闭盖全血模式(193.04±50.84)×109/L,二者差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);全自动法预稀释模式血小板平均体积结果为(8.12±0.69)fL,全自动法闭盖全血模式(8.15±0.67)fL,二者差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);全自动法预稀释模式血小板分布宽度结果为(16.28±0.57),全自动法闭盖全血模式(16.21±0.56),二者差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论对于健康人规范化血小板检测结果不受不同模式的影响。Objective To compare the accuracy of the results detecting whole blood platelets between the automatic method pre-dilution mode and closed lid mode.Methods Venous blood samples in normal subjects were detected platelets by the automatic pre-dilution mode and the closed lid mode.Results In comparing the same sample by different modes,platelets counts were（188.44±50.15） × 109 / L by fully automatic pre-dilution mode and（193.04±50.84） × 109 / L by automatic closed lid mode without significant difference（P 0.05）.The mean platelet volume was（8.12 ± 0.69）fL by the automatic pre-dilution mode and（8.15 ± 0.67）fL by automatic closed lid mode,there was no significant difference between the two modes（P 0.05）;the platelet distribution width was 16.28 ± 0.57 by the automatic pre-dilution Mode and 16.21 ± 0.56 by the automatic closed lid mode,there was no significant difference（P 0.05）.Conclusion For the healthy subjects,the standardized test results of platelet count are not affected by different detecting modes.

关 键 词：血小板 预稀释模式 闭盖全血模式 

分 类 号：R446.61[医药卫生—诊断学]