Member area login
You don't have or don't remember the password!
Click Here
Editor-in-chief
Maria Stella Graziani

Deputy Director
Martina Zaninotto

Associate Editors
Ferruccio Ceriotti
Davide Giavarina
Bruna Lo Sasso
Giampaolo Merlini
Martina Montagnana
Andrea Mosca
Paola Pezzati
Rossella Tomaiuolo
Matteo Vidali

EIC Assistant
Francesco Busardò

International Advisory Board Khosrow Adeli Canada
Sergio Bernardini Italy
Marcello Ciaccio Italy
Eleftherios Diamandis Canada
Philippe Gillery France
Kjell Grankvist Sweden
Hans Jacobs The Netherlands
Eric Kilpatrick UK
Magdalena Krintus Poland
Giuseppe Lippi Italy
Mario Plebani Italy
Sverre Sandberg Norway
Ana-Maria Simundic Croatia
Tommaso Trenti Italy
Cas Weykamp The Netherlands
Maria Willrich USA
Paul Yip Canada


Publisher
Biomedia srl
Via L. Temolo 4, 20126 Milano

Responsible Editor
Giuseppe Agosta

Editorial Secretary
Chiara Riva
Biomedia srl
Via L. Temolo 4, 20126 Milano
Tel. 0245498282
email: biochimica.clinica@sibioc.it

--------------------

ISSN print: 0393 – 0564
ISSN digital: 0392- 7091



BC: Articoli scritti da A. Di Fabio

Indagine conoscitiva sulla qualità del referto dell’esame emocromocitometrico
A survey on the quality of the hematological reporting among the Italian laboratories
<p>Introduction: the Working Groups &ldquo;Hematology&rdquo; and &ldquo;Extra-Analytical Variability&rdquo; of the Italian Society of Clinical Biochemistry (SIBioC) promoted a survey investigating the quality of the complete blood count reporting among Italian Laboratories.<br />Methods: the survey included 36 questions and was sent to all the SIBioC members. 251 laboratories participated in the survey.<br />Results: there is a full concordance in reporting the traditional parameters (leukocytes, erythrocytes and platelet count, hemoglobin, hematocrit and the calculated indices, plus the leukocytes differential count), while other relatively new parameters, like the mean platelet volume (MPV) and the platelet distribution width (PDW) are reported by 70% of the laboratories. A low percentage of laboratories (20-30%) do not report the presence of abnormal cell populations, if detected (blasts, immature granulocytes, plasma cells, prolymphocytes and erythroblasts). 70% of laboratories do not report the erythrocyte and leukocyte related parameters available on the new analyzers. Specific reference intervals for gender and age are adopted by 68% of the laboratories, but only 50% have instrument-specific intervals. 83% of the laboratories include interpretative comments in the report, but only in less than half of them these are harmonized according to the recent available recommendations. 83% of the laboratories have a shared document to manage critical values, that are communicated to the requesting physician by 90% of the laboratories.<br />Discussion: activities promoted by the SIBioC Hematology working group to harmonize the hematological report have been effective on traditional parameters reporting with a substantial improvement compared to the 2014 survey. Two issues remain however unresolved: the inclusion of interpretative comments and of the recent available parameters in the report.</p>
Biochimica Clinica ; 44(2) 129-142
Contributi Scientifici - Scientific Papers
 
I commenti interpretativi nel referto ematologico di laboratorio
Interpretative comments in the laboratory hematology report
<p>Interpretative comments in the laboratory reports&nbsp;can improve the quality of diagnostic information. The complete blood count with differential (CBC-diff) is one of the&nbsp;hematology laboratory tests with demonstrated clinical usefulness. CBC-diff may include a peripheral blood smear if&nbsp;numerical or morphological review criteria are fulfilled. As such, hematologists need specific skill for interpreting and&nbsp;conveying the diagnostic information to clinicians by using adequate communication approaches. A survey carried&nbsp;out by the SIBioC Diagnostic Hematology Study Group (GdS-DE) showed a heterogeneous situation about the use&nbsp;of the hematological interpretative comments. In each laboratory, different descriptions were used even for the same&nbsp;cell abnormalities. Moreover, some laboratories omit to report relevant morphological abnormalities, such as&nbsp;activated or atypical lymphocytes as well as immature granulocytes, which are often necessary for the diagnosis.&nbsp;Therefore, the GdS-DE has decided to select appropriate comments and to propose a standardized reporting system.&nbsp;First, 423 comments from 13 laboratories were analyzed. These comments were revised with the purpose of: a)&nbsp;reducing the number, b) standardizing the language, c) providing an information in a format that could be easily&nbsp;understood by patients and clinicians, and d) increasing the quality of clinical information. The GdS-DE decided to&nbsp;provide written information for both physicians and patients or for physician&rsquo;s use only. The former is represented by&nbsp;59 comments using a simple and not frightening language, whereas the latter is a letter for the physician in which&nbsp;more specific information is provided.</p>
Biochimica Clinica ; 40(3) 255-269
Documenti SIBioC - SIBioC Documents
 
Valutazione multicentrica dei conteggi cellulari ottenuti con 8 analizzatori ematologici automatici
Multicenter evaluation of blood cell counts on 8 automated hematology analyzers
<p>The cellular analysis&nbsp;performed on hematology analyzers is based on the interaction of cells with electrical or optical signals. The&nbsp;heterogeneity of adopted methods and technologies by different analyzers can translate in a lack of homogeneity in&nbsp;analytical performance. This study compares 8 hematological analyzers vs. optical microscopy (OM) and, where&nbsp;possible, also compares the analyzers among each other. Correlations were assessed by Pearson&#39;s coefficient of&nbsp;correlation, Passing and Bablock regression and Bland-Altman bias plot analysis. The comparison among analyzers&nbsp;regarding leukocyte differential counts showed a good level of agreement, except for the basophil cell count. For this&nbsp;&ldquo;critical population&rdquo;, the bias ranged from -5,8% (Cell-Dyn Sapphire vs. XN-9000) to 30,6% (Advia 2120i vs. XE-2100). The comparison between automated differential leukocyte counts and OM showed also a good level of&nbsp;agreement, with a bias ranging from -0,9% to 8.9%. The bias for basophil cell count was however very high (79.5%).</p>
Biochimica Clinica ; 40(3) 195-203
Contributi scientifici - Scientific Papers
 
Armonizzazione del referto ematologico con l’impego di unità di misura conformi al Sistema Internazionale
Harmonization of the hematology test report by using units according to the International System (SI)
<p>The&nbsp;need for harmonizing hematology reporting units remains an important challenge for the clinical laboratory community.&nbsp;In 2014, the SIBioC Diagnostic Hematology Study Group (GdS-DE) carried out a survey to assess the state-of-the-art&nbsp;of the Italian hematology laboratories. The survey showed that the majority of laboratories report results using units of&nbsp;measurement that do not conform to SI. In some European countries, initiatives to harmonize hematology reporting&nbsp;units were taken some years ago. In particular, in the UK for the reporting of laboratory hematology results the SI units&nbsp;have been used since April 2013 (this includes hemoglobin and mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentrations in g/L).&nbsp;The aim of this GdS-DE proposal is to advocate a national initiative for promoting the adoption of SI units for&nbsp;hematology reporting. This will optimise the comparability of results among different laboratories and prevent the&nbsp;misinterpretation of data, which may worsen the patient&#39;s outcome.</p>
Biochimica Clinica ; 39(6) 627-630
Opinioni - Opinions
 
Stato dell’arte della diagnostica ematologica nei servizi di Medicina di Laboratorio in Italia
State of the art of diagnostic hematology in clinical laboratories in Italy
<p>One of the challenges for laboratories&nbsp;performing diagnostic hematology is the harmonization of diagnostic process. This is a consequence of the rapid&nbsp;technological advancement that has characterized the recent development of automated blood cell counters, with&nbsp;new automation models and new types of parameters provided. In this context, the SIBioC Study Group of Diagnostic&nbsp;Hematology has conducted a survey among Italian laboratories. The aim was to focus on the different ways of&nbsp;organizing the service. The questionnaire consisted of 36 questions, made available on the SIBioC website for&nbsp;members and non members of the society. Responses were received via e-mail, regular mail or fax from 78&nbsp;laboratories. The survey showed differences among laboratories with regard to the organizational models adopted,&nbsp;degree of automation and completeness of final laboratory reports. However, a relative homogeneity in the validation<br />rules, review rate, turnaround time and amount and type of available resources was observed. An unexpected finding&nbsp;was the low relevance that the majority of laboratories gave to the occurrence of atypical lymphocytes, thus not&nbsp;reporting the presence of these cells in interpretative comments.</p>
Biochimica Clinica ; 39(1) 025-040
Contributi scientifici - Scientific Papers