 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Laboratory / April 2007Abbott Sapphire, input please
Anyone have experience with this instrument (Abbott Sapphire )? The inclussion of a flouresent flow cytometry leds itself to CD markers, true NRBC and possible fetal Hgb determination. Looks like all manufacture's will be going this way in the future (Sysmex probably already has?). I have seen one trauma center with two of these instruments and was impressed (I like having two methodologies for PLT). As this instrument is relatively new, I was looking for input. Many thanks in advance (MTIA). > Anyone have experience with this instrument (Abbott Sapphire )? The > inclussion of a flouresent flow cytometry leds itself to CD markers, true [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > is relatively new, I was looking for input. Many thanks in advance > (MTIA). We reviewed it along with other analysers on the market about six months ago and in the end went for the Sysmex 2100. Whilst the flourscent flow cytomtery sounds good, you'll probably find you'll spend all the anlyser's time doing blood counts and you'd be better off with a dedicated flow cytometer for the immunophenotyping. A friend who went through the same process more recently went for the ABX/Horiba as they were cheaper long term on reagents. Not really considering doing immunotyping (but always have "neat stuff"...not saying practical.... like that in my dreams). I was deliberately vague when I mentioned CD markers, I was referring to CD61 platelet "tag" (and possibly and or eventually a panel of three (?) plt markers) and having other capabilities with fluorescent flow. It seems to me that the technology used (impedance only) in the most popular selling instruments has been stuck in the 1980's mode for a too long. This thus requires experienced operators to make a lot of judgement calls in which the causal operator's proficiency may be lacking. I think the Sysmex and Abbot instruments probably use similar technology (fluorescent flow, two methodology counting and CD markers are actually 1990-95 technology), e.g. : better reticulocyte definition (no more "abnormal retic patterns" on difficult to dissolve hgb) and more accurate blast flagging (the bane of our current instrumentation). BTW, close inspection will show that many labs (both non-reference and reference), just ignore _certain_ the impedance only messaging / flagging. My experience with Sysmex is limited to the CA-1500, which I appraise as having good speed of analysis . I like working with the newest technology ($$?). All this said, it is still a difficult sell / change of mind set (e.g. retraining). >> Anyone have experience with this instrument (Abbott Sapphire )? The >> inclussion of a flouresent flow cytometry leds itself to CD markers, true [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > A friend who went through the same process more recently went for the > ABX/Horiba as they were cheaper long term on reagents. > My experience with Sysmex is limited to the CA-1500, which I appraise as > having good speed of analysis . I like working with the newest technology > ($$?). All this said, it is still a difficult sell / change of mind set > (e.g. retraining). Whan it comes to Sysmex you really do need to distinguish between the coag (crap) and the haematology (excellent). It's as though they are made by totally different firms. We're going Sysmex blood counts again, and wouldn'd consider changing, but having had sysmex coag we'd never have it again. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.