scholarly journals Atypical Lymphocyte

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
Atypical Lymphocyte

Automated flagging influences the inconsistency and bias of band cell and atypical lymphocyte morphological differentials

2004 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Wim van der Meer ◽  
Colin Stephen Scott ◽  
MarinusH. de Keijzer
Keyword(s):  
Blood Cell ◽  
Cell Count ◽  
Atypical Lymphocyte ◽  
Blood Cell Count ◽  
Observer Bias ◽  
Reporting Practices ◽  
The Third ◽  
Cell Counts ◽  
Left Shift

AbstractThis study evaluated inter- and intra-observer variabilities of band cell and atypical lymphocyte differentials and the influence of instrument flagging information on resulting microscopic differentials. Five stained slides with a range of band cell counts and five with variable numbers of atypical lymphocytes were sent for morphological review by 30 technicians. No supplementary full blood cell count information was provided. Two months later, the same slides were sent, together with their corresponding analyzer reports comprising the full blood cell count, automated differentials and flags, to the same technicians. The first and second appraisals of band cells and variant lymphocytes both showed poor levels of inter-observer consistency. Observed values for all slides were very wide and suggested a high inherent predisposition to erroneous reporting practices. Analysis of category trends showed that analyzer left shift or immature granulocytes flags had no influence on observer band cell assessments as downward vs. upward category revisions were evenly balanced. The findings for atypical lymphocytes were, however, somewhat different. Two slides with no flags both showed balanced category revisions, whereas two of the three slides with atypical lymphocyte flags showed clear evidence of upward category revision. The third slide with an atypical lymphocyte flag did not show any overall category trend, but six of the seven observers who in the first examination recorded atypical lymphocyte estimates of ≤30% revised their estimates upward when the slides were examined the second time. These results suggest that morphologist access to an analyzer report and flagging information is unlikely to affect the “randomness” of band cell determinations but it may induce observer bias in variant lymphocyte estimates.

The atypical lymphocyte

1967 ◽  
Vol 42 (6) ◽  
pp. 923-936 ◽  
Author(s):  
Turner A. Wood ◽  
Eugene P. Frenkel
Keyword(s):  
Atypical Lymphocyte

scholarly journals PS1289 THE ATYPICAL LYMPHOCYTE COUNT: A NOVEL PREDICTIVE FACTOR FOR SEVERE DENGUE INFECTION

HemaSphere ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (S1) ◽  
pp. 589-590
Author(s):  
V. Abeysuriya ◽  
C. Choong ◽  
S. de Mel ◽  
B.U. Thilakawardana ◽  
P. de Mel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Predictive Factor ◽  
Lymphocyte Count ◽  
Dengue Infection ◽  
Severe Dengue ◽  
Atypical Lymphocyte

The circulating “atypical” lymphocyte

1978 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas A. Shiftan ◽  
John Mendelsohn
Keyword(s):  
Atypical Lymphocyte

Atypical Lymphocyte

2003 ◽  
Vol 2003 (0115) ◽  
pp. 100601-100601
Author(s):  
P. Maslak
Keyword(s):  
Atypical Lymphocyte

scholarly journals Atypical lymphocyte morphology: an adverse prognostic factor for disease progression in stage A CLL independent of trisomy 12

1997 ◽  
Vol 98 (4) ◽  
pp. 934-939 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. G. Oscier ◽  
E. Matutes ◽  
A. Copplestone ◽  
R. M. Pickering ◽  
R. Chapman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prognostic Factor ◽  
Disease Progression ◽  
Atypical Lymphocyte ◽  
Adverse Prognostic Factor ◽  
Trisomy 12

scholarly journals Atypical lymphocyte morphology in SARS-CoV-2 infection

2020 ◽  
Vol 216 (9) ◽  
pp. 153063 ◽  
Author(s):  
Siraj M. El Jamal ◽  
Christian Salib ◽  
Aryeh Stock ◽  
Norlita I. Uriarte-Haparnas ◽  
Benjamin S. Glicksberg ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atypical Lymphocyte

Interference of atypical lymphocyte examination by EDTA-K2

2009 ◽  
Vol 29 (5) ◽  
pp. 595-596
Author(s):  
Xiao-Xia FAN ◽  
Fei WU ◽  
Ling WANG
Keyword(s):  
Atypical Lymphocyte

Proportion Positive for Epstein-Barr Virus, Cytomegalovirus, Human Herpesvirus 6, Toxoplasma, and Human Immunodeficiency Virus Types 1 and 2 in Heterophile-Negative Patients With an Absolute Lymphocytosis or an Instrument-Generated Atypical Lymphocyte Flag

2000 ◽  
Vol 124 (9) ◽  
pp. 1324-1330 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yotis F. Tsaparas ◽  
Malcolm L. Brigden ◽  
Richard Mathias ◽  
Eva Thomas ◽  
Janet Raboud ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Human Immunodeficiency Virus ◽  
Epstein Barr Virus ◽  
Human Herpesvirus ◽  
Atypical Lymphocyte ◽  
Human Herpesvirus 6 ◽  
Barr Virus ◽  
Immunodeficiency Virus ◽  
Epstein Barr ◽  
Testing Algorithm ◽  
Viral Serology

Abstract Objectives.—To determine the proportion of patients with evidence of an acute infection due to Epstein-Barr virus (EBV), cytomegalovirus (CMV), human herpesvirus 6 (HHV-6), Toxoplasma, or human immunodeficiency virus types 1 and 2 (HIV-1 and HIV-2) in heterophile-negative patients with an absolute lymphocytosis or an instrument-generated atypical lymphocyte flag, and to develop a cost-effective testing algorithm for managing such heterophile-negative patients. Design.—We conducted a prospective investigation of 70 selected outpatients who tested negative for heterophile antibody in association with an absolute lymphocytosis or instrument-generated atypical lymphocyte flag. The control population consisted of 50 patients who were heterophile negative and had a normal absolute lymphocyte count and no instrument-generated atypical lymphocyte flag. Setting.—A large outpatient laboratory system. Intervention.—Viral serology for HHV-6 was performed by immunofluorescence, and all other serologies were performed by enzyme-linked immunoassay. All testing was for immunoglobulin (Ig) M antibodies, except in the case of HIV. Results.—The proportion of study patients positive for EBV was 40% (28/70); for CMV, 39% (27/70); for HHV-6, 25% (16/65); for Toxoplasma, 3% (2/70); and for HIV, 0% (0/70). All 50 control patients were negative for EBV IgM antibodies. When patients with more than 1 positive viral test were excluded from analysis, positivity was 20% (9/45) for EBV, 22% (10/45) for CMV, 9% (4/45) for HHV-6, and 2% (1/45) for Toxoplasma. Utilizing hypothesis-generating logistic regression models, Downey type II atypical lymphocytes were significantly associated with EBV positivity (P = .006), while Downey type III lymphocytes were significantly associated with HHV-6 positivity (P = .016), and there was a trend for the association of Downey type I lymphocytes with CMV positivity (P = .097). Conclusions.—A positive viral serology was identified in 70% of study patients. Multiple positive serologies complicate establishing a definitive diagnosis. Potential cost savings may be associated with the use of an appropriate testing algorithm.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document