Sysmex XN-1000/2000 Technical Guide

Quality control is the core basis for determining the status of instruments. Three level quality control can cover all routine parameters, while two-level body fluid quality control is used in BF mode. If the quality control results drift, calibration, reagent batch number, light source, flow chamber, sampling needle, and software settings should be checked. If multiple parameters are abnormal simultaneously, priority should be given to common components such as sheath flow, laser, pressure, and sample processing. If a single parameter is abnormal, priority should be given to checking the channel and reagent corresponding to that parameter. For advanced parameters such as WPC, HPC, RET, PLT-F, it should be confirmed whether the software activation status and quality control materials are covered.

Reliability and clinical value of results

The technical value of the XN series lies not only in its high throughput, but also in the clinical depth of its parameter system. Standard CBC parameters can meet routine screening, while NRBC direct measurement and correction of WBC can reduce manual review. The six part classification of WDF and IG can provide indications of infection, inflammation, and hematological malignancies. The abnormal population prompt of WPC can help identify primitive cells, abnormal lymphocytes, and HPC. RET and Ret He can be used for anemia differentiation and treatment monitoring. PLT-F and IPF can be used for predicting thrombocytopenia and recovery. The BF mode can enhance the standardization of fluid cell analysis. HPC can assist in determining the timing of stem cell collection.

For laboratory engineers, understanding the clinical background of these parameters can help determine which abnormalities are instrument problems and which are sample or disease-related interferences during troubleshooting. For example, an increase in primitive cells, abnormal lymphocytes, an increase in nucleated red blood cells, platelet aggregation, red blood cell debris, cold agglutination, etc., may all affect scatter plots and counting results. If there is an abnormal group in the scatter plot, it should be comprehensively judged based on alarm information, microscopic examination review, and clinical information, rather than simply attributed to instrument failure.