Analyze Diet

Evaluation of the automated hematology analyzer Sysmex XT-2000iV™ compared to the ADVIA® 2120 for its use in dogs, cats, and horses: Part I–precision, linearity, and accuracy of complete blood cell count.

Abstract: The automated laser-based hematology analyzer Sysmex XT-2000iV™ providing a complete blood cell count (CBC) and 5-part differential has been introduced in large veterinary laboratories. The aim of the current study was to determine precision, linearity, and accuracy of the Sysmex analyzer. Reference method for the accuracy study was the laser-based hematology analyzer ADVIA® 2120. For evaluation of accuracy, consecutive fresh blood samples from healthy and diseased cats (n = 216), dogs (n = 314), and horses (n = 174) were included. A low intra-assay coefficient of variation (CV) of approximately 1% was seen for the CBC except platelet count (PLT). An intra-assay CV ranging between 2% and 5.5% was evident for the differential count except for feline and equine monocytes (7.7%) and horse eosinophils (15.7%). Linearity was excellent for white blood cell count (WBC), hematocrit value, red blood cell count (RBC), and PLT. For all evaluated species, agreement was excellent for WBC and RBC, with Spearman rank correlation coefficients (r(s)) ranging from >0.99 to 0.98. Hematocrit value correlated excellently in cats and dogs, whereas for horses, a good correlation was evident. A good correlation between both analyzers was seen in feline and equine PLT (r(s) = 0.89 and 0.92, respectively), whereas correlation was excellent for dogs (r(s) = 0.93). Biases were close to 0 except for mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration (4.11 to -7.25 mmol/l) and canine PLT (57 × 10(9)/l). Overall, the performance of the Sysmex analyzer was excellent and compared favorably with the ADVIA analyzer.
Publication Date: 2012-03-01 PubMed ID: 22362798DOI: 10.1177/1040638711425572Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
  • Comparative Study
  • Evaluation Study
  • Journal Article

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

The research article focuses on a comparison study between the Sysmex XT-2000iV™, a laser-based hematology analyzer, and its predecessor the ADVIA® 2120, with the objective of determining the new device’s precision, linearity, and accuracy in regard to complete blood cell count on dogs, cats, and horses.

Methodology

  • The aim of the study was to assess three principal attributes of the Sysmex Analyzer: precision, linearity, and accuracy.
  • The ADVIA® 2120 analyzer was used as the reference point (standard) for the accuracy study.
  • The study included fresh blood samples from healthy and diseased cats (n = 216), dogs (n = 314), and horses (n = 174) to evaluate the accuracy of the Sysmex Analyzer.

Findings

  • The study found a low intra-assay coefficient of variation (CV) of about 1% for the complete blood cell count (CBC) excluding platelet count (PLT).
  • An intra-assay CV between 2% and 5.5% was observed for the differential count, except for feline and equine monocytes (7.7%) and horse eosinophils (15.7%).
  • The linearity was excellent for white blood cell count (WBC), hematocrit value, red blood cell count (RBC), and PLT.

Correlation and Agreement

  • The agreement between the Sysmex and ADVIA analyzers was excellent for WBC and RBC, with Spearman rank correlation coefficients (rs) ranging from more than 0.99 to 0.98 for all the evaluated species.
  • In cats and dogs, the hematocrit value showed excellent correlation.
  • Platelet count in felines and equines displayed good correlation (rs = 0.89 and 0.92, respectively), while in dogs it was excellent (rs = 0.93).

Overall Outcome

  • Biases were almost negligible except for Mean Corpuscular Hemoglobin Concentration (4.11 to -7.25 mmol/l) and canine Platelet count (57 × 10(9)/l).
  • Overall, the performance of the Sysmex Analyzer was excellent, as it compared favorably with the ADVIA analyzer.

The study concludes that the Sysmex Analyzer is an effective and accurate tool for complete blood cell count in dogs, cats, and horses. Despite some minor discrepancies, it has the potential to replace the older model, ADVIA analyzer.

Cite This Article

APA
Bauer N, Nakagawa J, Dunker C, Failing K, Moritz A. (2012). Evaluation of the automated hematology analyzer Sysmex XT-2000iV™ compared to the ADVIA® 2120 for its use in dogs, cats, and horses: Part I–precision, linearity, and accuracy of complete blood cell count. J Vet Diagn Invest, 23(6), 1168-1180. https://doi.org/10.1177/1040638711425572

Publication

ISSN: 1943-4936
NlmUniqueID: 9011490
Country: United States
Language: English
Volume: 23
Issue: 6
Pages: 1168-1180

Researcher Affiliations

Bauer, Natali
  • Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, Clinical Pathology and Clinical Pathophysiology, Justus-Liebig-University Giessen, Frankfurterstr. 129, 35392 Giessen, Germany. Natali. Bauer@vetmed.uni-giessen.de
Nakagawa, Julia
    Dunker, Cathrin
      Failing, Klaus
        Moritz, Andreas

          MeSH Terms

          • Animals
          • Automation
          • Blood Cell Count / instrumentation
          • Blood Cell Count / veterinary
          • Cats / blood
          • Dogs / blood
          • Horses / blood
          • Reproducibility of Results
          • Sensitivity and Specificity

          Citations

          This article has been cited 8 times.
          1. Zelmer KC, Bauer N, Moritz A. Evaluation of the scil vCell 5, a novel laser- and impedance-based point-of-care hematology analyzer, for use in dogs and cats. J Vet Diagn Invest 2022 May;34(3):504-517.
            doi: 10.1177/10406387221083621pubmed: 35331075google scholar: lookup
          2. Grebert M, Granat F, Braun JP, Leroy Q, Bourgès-Abella N, Trumel C. Validation of the Sysmex XN-V hematology analyzer for canine specimens. Vet Clin Pathol 2021 Jun;50(2):184-197.
            doi: 10.1111/vcp.12936pubmed: 34152026google scholar: lookup
          3. Bagardi M, Bassi J, Stranieri A, Rabbogliatti V, Gioeni D, Magnone W, Pigoli C. Chylopericardium Effusion in a Lac Alaotra Bamboo Lemur (Hapalemur alaotrensis). Animals (Basel) 2021 Feb 19;11(2).
            doi: 10.3390/ani11020536pubmed: 33669516google scholar: lookup
          4. Stirn M, Moritz A, Bauer N. Rate of manual leukocyte differentials in dog, cat and horse blood samples using ADVIA 120 cytograms. BMC Vet Res 2014 Jun 5;10:125.
            doi: 10.1186/1746-6148-10-125pubmed: 24903909google scholar: lookup
          5. Siddiqui MSI, Rahman MA, Islam S, Dey PR, Islam MK, Begum S, Rahman MM. Comparative Clinico-Haematological Alterations of Lumpy Skin Disease Affected Cattle at Different Ages and Periods of Disease in Bangladesh. Vet Med Sci 2025 Sep;11(5):e70549.
            doi: 10.1002/vms3.70549pubmed: 40788148google scholar: lookup
          6. Legroux D, Kersten L, Barral G, Mauras A, Buronfosse T, Ramery E. Evaluation of blood erythroid parameters in male broiler chickens (Ross 308) with the Sysmex XT-2000iV and Sysmex XN-1000V analyzers and determination of hematological reference intervals obtained with manual and instrumental methods. Vet Clin Pathol 2025 Jun;54(2):106-119.
            doi: 10.1111/vcp.70009pubmed: 40462459google scholar: lookup
          7. Costa C, Sousa AP, Silva G, Queiroga F, Martins Â, Andrade D, Silvestre-Ferreira AC. Analytical Validation of Two Point-of-Care Assays for Hematological Analysis in the Miranda Donkey. Vet Sci 2024 Sep 22;11(9).
            doi: 10.3390/vetsci11090450pubmed: 39330829google scholar: lookup
          8. Zelmer KC, Moritz A, Bauer N. Evaluation of canine and feline leukocyte differential counts obtained with the scil vCell 5 compared to the Advia 2120 hematology analyzer and a manual method. J Vet Diagn Invest 2023 Nov;35(6):679-697.
            doi: 10.1177/10406387231187899pubmed: 37612877google scholar: lookup