Mini-Review
Optimization of Blood Smear Review for Leucocyte and Lymphocytes
Woinshet Hailu,Lulit Hailu
Corresponding Author: Hailu W, Tikur Anbesa Specialized Hospital Laboratory, Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Received: May 06, 2020; Revised: April 29, 2020; Accepted: May 29, 2020
Citation: Hailu W & Hailu L. (2020) Optimization of Blood Smear Review for Leucocyte and Lymphocytes. J Blood Transfusions Dis, 3(1): 147-149.
Copyrights: ©2020 Hailu W & Hailu L. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Share :
  • 1136

    Views & Citations
  • 136

    Likes & Shares

Evaluation of peripheral blood morphology is an important screening tool for many diseases. When abnormalities are detected by the automated hematology analyzer, manual microscopic review of the blood smear is necessary to determine the next course of action. Thus, the International Consensus Group for Hematology Review prepare criteria to review peripheral blood slide after analyzing by hematology analyzers. For better advantage of this criterion laboratories must optimize it with their setting.

Keywords: Peripheral blood morphology, International Consensus Group for Hematology Review criteria, Peripheral smear review

INTRODUCTION

Blood smear examination is a laboratory work that involves examining of peripheral blood cells smeared on a slide. It is clinically significance in the investigation and management of different infectious and noninfectious diseases which produce changes in the appearance of blood cells. It is useful to provide diagnostic information such as; monitoring of therapy and indicating adverse effects of treatment.  In particular, the analysis of white blood cells is a topic of great interest to hematologists [1,2]. Leucocytes are heterogeneous group of nucleated cells that are responsible for the body’s defenses against diseases. The two groups of leucocytes are; granulocytes include neutrophil, eosinophil and basophils, agranulocytes are lymphocytes and monocytes [3-5].

The morphological analysis of blood cells is performed manually by skilled laboratory personnel. However, the speed and accuracy of automated hematology analyzers have revolutionized workflows in the clinical hematology laboratory [6-10]. In Europe, only laboratory trained staff members generally read a blood smear, whereas in United States, physicians have often done this [11]. In comparison with the procedure for an automated blood count, the examination of a blood smear is a labor-intensive and, therefore, relatively expensive investigation and must be used judiciously [12].

Despite the development of automated hematology analyzers for reliable blood count, examining smear under microscope is still indispensable. It is important when the data obtained from the analyzer are qualitatively or quantitatively abnormal. Evaluation of blood smear is also an important screening tool for differentiating between reactive and malignant processes [13].

There are currently very few guidelines regarding how the clinical laboratory should deal with smear reviews. The International Consensus Group for Hematology Review prepare criteria to review peripheral blood slide. The guidelines of the International Consensus Group for Hematology Review recommends smear reviews is for white blood cell count <4.0 or >30.0, platelet <100 or >1000, neutrophil <1.0 or >20.0, lymphocyte adult >5.0, Lym for <12 yrs , >7.0, Mono >1.5 (Adult) or >3.0 (<12 yrs old), Eos >2.0, Baso >0.5, NRBC any value. Different laboratories optimize this criterion base on their settings [7].

Optimization of blood smear review for leucocyte 

The International Consensus Group for Hematology Review recommends smear reviews for WBC <4x109/L and >30x109/L [7]. Pratumvinit B et al. found the optimized criteria for leukocytes to be <1.5×109/L and >30 [3].  Joubert J. explains that leucocyte count 2.8×109/L is considered for review in adult black male [14]. Similarly, Hailu et al found it to be 2.5 ×109/L and >27×109/L for leucocyte [15]. This difference in the threshold value tell us that there will be ignored peripheral smear reviews if consensus group criteria

Optimization of blood smear review for lymphocytes

The International Consensus Group for Hematology Review recommends smear reviews for all first-time lymphocytosis cases where absolute lymphocyte count is >5×109/L in adults, for children >7×109/L [7]. Tseng et al. found the threshold value for peripheral smear review of lymphocyte count to be between 5×109/L and 10×109/L [16]. A study done by Andrew et al. got a value of >4×109/L for patients above 67 years and for age between 50-67 a value of >6.7×109/L [17]. Another study done by Sun P et al. showed optimal cutoff value to be >7×109/L [17]. Another study by Gulati et al. showed threshold value of >7×109/L for age of >14 years and >10×109/L for age group of 1-14 years and >14×109/L for less than one year [18]. Pratumvinit B et al. found the optimized criteria for lymphocytes to be >7×109/L [3]. Francophone group found a threshold value of >5×109/L for adults and >6×109/L for children [19]. Hailu W .et al found it to be 2.5 ×109/L and >27×109/L for leucocyte and for lymphocyte>4.5×109/L and >6×109/L [20].

Decrease in review rate as a result of optimizing the review criteria

Froom et al. explain that adjusting the smear threshold level is important to minimize the smear review rate. They found that setting the threshold level decreases the smear review rate from 39.7% to 5.6% [21] and Comar RS et al. also shows that review rate to be 37.3% [22]. Similarly, Pratumvinit B et al. found the review rate to decrease to 24.22% [3]. These decrease in review rate leads to the proper use of time and resources. 

CONCLUSION

Peripheral smear review is an important test in hematology laboratory. So, it’s appropriate use is very essential for the laboratory as well as for the clinicians. To use this consensus internationally in different countries it will be difficult due to different populations with different normal range and different hematology analyzers. So, each laboratory should optimize the criteria for smear review, based on the International Consensus Group for Hematology Review, and optimize it to maximize efficiency.


1.  Greer JJ, Foerster J, Lukens JN (2003) Wintrobe's Clinical Hematology (11th Edn) Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Publishers, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.

2.  Adewoyin AS, Nwogoh B (2014) Peripheral blood film - a A review. Ann Ib Postgrad Med 12: 71-79.

3.  Pratumvinit B, Wongkrajang P, Reesukumal K, Klinbua C, Niamjoy P (2013) Validation and optimization of criteria for manual smear review following automated blood cell analysis in a large university hospital. Arch Pathol Lab Med 137: 408-414.

4.  Mehta AB, Hoffbrand V (2000) Hematology At Glance (2nd Edn) Blackwell science ltd, London, UK.

5.  Bradley T (2012) Hematology Clinical Microscopy and Body Fluids Glossary. College of American Pathologists, Illinois, USA.

6.  Deshmukh A, Panditrao A (2014) Automated leukemia detection using contour signature in blood microscopic images. Int J Res Comp Commun Technol 3: 304-308.

7.   Barnes PW, McFadden SL, Machin SJ, Simson E, (2005) International consensus group for hematology 2005 The international consensus group for hematology review: suggested Suggested criteria for action following automated CBC and WBC differential analysis. Lab Hematol 11: 83-90.

8.   Caramer P, Hanek M (2011) Prognostic factors in chronic lymphocytic leukemia-what do we need to know? Nat Rev Clin Oncol 8(1): 38-47.

9.   Bain BJ (2005) Diagnosis from the blood smear. N Engl J Med 353: 498-507.

10. Eichhorst B, Robak T, Montserrat E, Ghia P, Hillmen P (2015) Chronic lymphocytic leukaemia: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines. Ann Oncol 19: 320-325.

11. Novelli S, Brionesas J, Sierra J (2013) Epidemiology of lymphoid malignancies: last Last decade update. Springer Plus 2: 70-75.

12.    Perez K, Winer ES (2011) Chronic lymphocytic leukemia: Something old, something new and something borrowed. Med Health R I 94: 15-18.

13.Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (2007) Reference leukocyte (WBC) differential count (proportional) and evaluation of instrument methods: Approved standard (2nd Edn) CLSI Document H20A2.

14.    Joubert J, Weyers R, Raubenheimer J (2014) Reducing unnecessary blood smear examinations: can Can Sysmex blood cell analysers help? Med Technol 28: 6-12. 

15.    Hailu W, Tsegaye A, Hassen F, Hailu L (2019) Setting threshold value for peripheral blood morphology slide review of leucocytes and lymphocytes at TikurAnbessa Specialized Hospital in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. J Hematol Blood Disord 5: 201.

16. Tseng V, Morgan AS, Leith CP, Yang DT (2014) Efficient assessment of peripheral blood lymphocytosis in adults: Developing new thresholds for blood smear review by pathologists. Clin Chem Lab Med 52: 1763-1770.

17.    Froom P, Isakov E, Barak M (2014) Criteria for reflex peripheral smear review in infants. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 74: 366-368.

18.    Andrews JM, Cruser DL, Myers JB, Fernelius CA, Holm MT et al. (2008) Using peripheral smear review, age and absolute lymphocyte count as predictors of abnormal peripheral blood lymphocytoses diagnosed by flow cytometry. Leuk Lymphoma 49: 1731-1737.

19.    Sun P, Kowalski EM, Cheng CK, Shawwa A, Liwski RS, et al. (2014) Predictive significance of absolute lymphocyte count and morphology in adults with a new onset peripheral blood lymphocytosis. J Clin Pathol 67: 1062-1066.

20.    Gulati G, Song J, Florea AD, Gong J (2013) Purpose and criteria for blood smear scan, blood smear examination, and blood smear review. Ann Lab Med 33: 1-7.

21.    Geneviève F, Galoisy AC, Mercier-Bataille D, Wagner-Ballon O, Trimoreau F, et al. (2014) Smear Microscopy Revision: Ppropositions by the GFHC. Feuillets de Biologie 45: 317-325.

22.    Comar SR, Malvezzi M, Pasquini R (2014) Are the review criteria for automated complete blood counts of the International Society of Laboratory Hematology suitable for all hematology laboratories? Rev Bras Hematol Hemoter 36: 219-225.