Evaluation of the contraves AL 820 automated haematology analyser for domestic, pet and laboratory animals
- 29 Downloads
A comprehensive evaluation of the automated haematology analyser Contraves AL 820 was initiated to determine the suitability of this instrument for veterinary purposes in domestic, pet and laboratory animal species. The AL 820 (AVL Medical Instruments, Schaffhausen, Switzerland) is an impedance cell counter with automated threshold setting for rapid adaptation to cell characteristics of different animal species. Storage capability for up to 200 data sets with histograms is provided. Excellent precision, linearity and carry-over features of the AL 820 have been demonstrated in tests with rat, mouse, cat, dog, cattle and horse blood samples. Accuracy of haemoglobin and haematocrit measurements with respect to reference methods was characterised by strong linear correlation. The patented cyanide-free AL 820 method for haemoglobin determination compared very well to the haemoglobincyanide reference method. Accuracy of the red blood cell, haemoglobin, haematocrit, mean corpuscular volume, white blood cell count and platelet count parameters was generally good, when compared to the established laboratory routine method (the predecessor model AL 801) or to a high end automated haematology analyser (Abbott Cell-Dyn CD 3500). Although variation of platelet count measurements was greater than variation of all other parameters, it was considered acceptable particularly with respect to the lack of excelling alternatives. Poor accuracy of feline platelet counts was attributed to overlapping size distribution of red blood cells and platelets in this species. The overall favourable acceptance of the AL 820 was based on easy handling, simple maintenance and pronounced flexibility of this instrument at an economical purchase price. A sample volume of 30 µl and a throughput of up to 60 samples per hour are distinct advantages and render the AL 820 suitable for medium-sized laboratories. With few exceptions, the instrument provides reliable results for all major animal species encountered in routine veterinary haematology.
KeywordsAutomated haematology analyser Contraves AL 820 Electronic cell counter Evaluation Veterinary haematology
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Bablock W, Passing H (1985) Application of statistical procedures in analytical instrument testing. J Autom Chem 7:74–79Google Scholar
- Bablock W, Passing H, Bender R et al. (1988) A general regression procedure for method transformation; application of linear regression procedures for method comparison studies in clinical chemistry part III. J Clin Chem Clin Biochem 26:793–790Google Scholar
- Bienzle D, Jacobs RM, Lumsden JH et al. (1994) Comparison of two automated multichannel haematology analysers in domestic animals. Comp Haematol Int 4:162–166Google Scholar
- Davies DT, Fisher GV (1991) The validation and application of the Technicon H*1 for the complete automated evaluation of laboratory animal haematology. Comp Haematol Int 1:91–105Google Scholar
- Eisenwiener HG, Bablock W, Bardorff W et al. (1984) Statistische Auswertung beim Methodenvergleich. Lab Med 8:232–244Google Scholar
- England JM, Rowan RM, Van Assendelft OW et al. (1984) Protocol for evaluation of automated blood cell counters. Clin Lab Haematol 6:69–84Google Scholar
- Kieffer JA (1995) Cell Dyn 3500 - a fully automated instrument for veterinary haematology: performance evaluation for the analysis of mouse and rat blood. Doctoral thesis Veterinary Medical Faculty, University of Zurich, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
- Passing H, Bablock W (1983) A new biometrical procedure for testing the equality of measurements from two different analytical methods; application of linear regression procedures for method comparison studies in clinical chemistry part I. J Clin Chem Clin Biochem 21:709–720Google Scholar
- Tvedten H (1993) Advanced haematology analysers interpretation of results. J Vet Clin Pathol 22:72–80Google Scholar
- Tvedten HW, Wilkins RJ (1988) Automated blood cell counting systems: a comparison of the Coulter S-Plus IV, Ortho ELT-8/DS, Ortho ELT-8/WS, Technicon H-1, and Sysmex E-5000. J Vet Clin Pathol 17:47–54Google Scholar