单平台与双平台流式细胞术T细胞亚群绝对计数的比较  

Comparison of T cell subset absolute counts between single-platform and double-platform flow cytometry

作　　者：胡晓蕾[1] 周灵玲[1] 赵志钢[1] 

机构地区：[1]浙江大学丽水医院暨丽水市中心医院检验科,浙江丽水323000

出　　处：《检验医学》2016年第7期593-598,共6页Laboratory Medicine

基　　金：浙江省丽水市科技计划项目(2012ZC029)

摘　　要：目的寻找基于CYTOMICS FC500流式细胞仪(简称CYTOMICS FC500)的相对稳定、经济的外周血T细胞亚群绝对计数方法。方法分别用基于CYTOMICS FC500的双平台和单平台流式细胞术(FCM)同时检测280例患者外周血T细胞亚群的绝对值,比较2种方法结果的相关性和一致性;评价高值和低值样本用2种方法检测的批内和批间精密度。结果双平台与单平台FCM T细胞亚群绝对计数结果的相关性好(r≥0.984),但存在明显差异(P<0.01),双平台FCM检测的CD4+CD8-(CD4+)T细胞绝对值比单平台FCM平均低36.5(-71.8,114.7)个/μL,差异百分比为8.7%(-13.8%,31.2%);双平台FCM检测的CD4-CD8+(CD8+)T细胞绝对值比单平台FCM平均低41.4(-84.4,167.2)个/μL,差异百分比为8.7%(-13.9%,31.3%);双平台FCM检测的CD4-CD8-T细胞(DNT)和CD4+CD8+T细胞(DPT)绝对值也均低于单平台FCM。双平台FCM检测CD4+T细胞、CD8+T细胞、DNT、DPT绝对值高值和低值的批内变异系数(CV)分别为3.5%和4.2%、3.8%和3.4%、6.1%和7.6%、9.5%和18.7%,批间CV分别为5.1%和5.9%、5.5%和5.1%、7.7%和9.6%、12.2%和24.6%,低于单平台FCM检测各T细胞亚群绝对值高值和低值的批内CV(4.0%和4.8%、4.2%和4.0%、6.7%和8.6%、11.1%和21.4%)和批间CV(6.3%和7.5%、7.0%和6.8%、8.5%和10.3%、13.6%和26.4%)。结论基于CYTOMICS FC500的双平台和单平台FCM外周血T细胞亚群绝对计数结果差异较大,不宜在同一时间段内交替使用,其中双平台FCM精密度更高,且能节约成本,可优先选择。Objective To find out a stable and economical method based on CYTOMICS FC500 for T cell subset absolute counts in peripheral blood. Methods T cell subset absolute counts in 280 patients＇ peripheral blood were determined by single-platform and double-platform CYTOMICS FC500 flow cytometry（FCM）,and the consistency and correlation of the 2 methods were analyzed. The within-run and between-run precisions of the 2 methods in high-level and low-level samples were evaluated. Results The double-platform FCM correlated well with single-platform FCM for T cell subset absolute counts（r≥0.984）,but T cell subset absolute counts differed between the 2 methods（P0.01）. The mean absolute count of double-platform FCM for CD4^＋CD8^-（CD4^＋）T cell was lower than that of single-platform FCM by 36.5（-71.8,114.7）cells/μL,and the mean bias percentage was 8.7%（-13.8%,31.2%）. The mean absolute count of double-platform FCM for CD4^-CD8^＋（CD8^＋）T cell was lower than that of single-platform FCM by 41.4（-84.4,167.2）cells/μL,and the mean bias percentage was 8.7%（-13.9%,31.3%）. The absolute counts of CD4^-CD8^- T cell（DNT） and CD4^＋CD8^＋ T cell（DPT） obtained by double-platform FCM were lower than those by single-platform FCM. The within-run coefficients of variation（CV） of double-platform FCM for CD4^＋ T cell,CD8^＋T cell,DNT cell and DPT cell in high-level and low-level samples were 3.5% and 4.2%,3.8% and 3.4%,6.1% and 7.6%,and 9.5% and 18.7%. The between-run CV were 5.1% and 5.9%,5.5% and 5.1%,7.7% and 9.6%,and 12.2% and 24.6%,which were lower than those of single-platform FCM. The within-run CV of single-platform were 4.0% and 4.8%,4.2% and 4.0%,6.7% and 8.6%,and 11.1% and 21.4%,and the between-run CV were 6.3% and 7.5%,7.0% and 6.8%,8.5% and 10.3%,and 13.6% and 26.4%. Conclusions The differences of T cell subset absolute counts between double-platform and single-platform FCM based on CYTOMICS FC500 are too big to use the 2 methods alternately. Furthermore,double-platform FC

关 键 词：流式细胞术 T细胞亚群 绝对计数 单平台 双平台 

分 类 号：R446.61[医药卫生—诊断学]