...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Microscopy research and technique >Spot counting to locate fetal cells in maternal blood and tissue: A comparison of manual and automated microscopy
【24h】

Spot counting to locate fetal cells in maternal blood and tissue: A comparison of manual and automated microscopy

机译：斑点计数以定位母体血液和组织中的胎儿细胞：手动显微镜和自动显微镜的比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Background: Fetal cell detection in maternal tissue requires an accurate, efficient, and reproducible microscopy method. Our objective was to compare manual scoring to a commercially available automated scanning system for the detection of chromosome signals by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). Methods: X and Y chromosome FISH signals were detected on slides of calibrated mixtures of blood, paraffin-embedded liver sections, and post-termination blood. For manual scoring (400* magnification), the number of cells located and duration of scoring were recorded. For automated scanning using the Metasystems Metafer3/Metafer4 Scanning System (200*magnification), duration of scanning, number of gallery images generated, duration of manual review of gallery images, and number of confirmed fetal cells were recorded. Results: From all slides the number of target fetal cells located by manual and automated microscopy was highly correlated (r = 0.90). However, automated scanning required on average 4-fold more time than manual scoring (P < 0.0001), with an average automated scanning time of 9.7 h per slide compared with 2.4 h per slide when scored manually. Conclusions: In general, the accuracy of automated and manual microscopy is comparable, although manual scoring is more efficient because of the level of magnification necessary for automated scanning of cells, and a large number of gallery images generated by automated scanning that must then be reviewed manually. This suggests that when rapid analysis is required (i.e., clinical situations), manual microscopy is preferable. In contrast, automated scanning may have advantages over manual microscopy when time constraints are less imposed (i.e., research situations).
机译：背景：母体组织中的胎儿细胞检测需要一种准确，有效且可重复的显微镜检查方法。我们的目标是将人工评分与可通过荧光原位杂交（FISH）检测染色体信号的商用自动扫描系统进行比较。方法：在校正过的血液，石蜡包埋的肝切片和终止后血液的混合玻片上检测X和Y染色体FISH信号。对于手动评分（放大400倍），记录了所定位的细胞数量和评分时间。为了使用Metasystems Metafer3 / Metafer4扫描系统（放大200倍）进行自动扫描，记录了扫描持续时间，生成的图库图像数量，手动查看图库图像的时间以及确认的胎儿细胞数量。结果：在所有载玻片上，通过手动和自动显微镜检查发现的目标胎儿细胞数量高度相关（r = 0.90）。但是，自动扫描平均需要比手动评分多4倍的时间（P <0.0001），平均自动扫描时间为每张幻灯片9.7小时，而手动评分为每张幻灯片2.4小时。结论：一般而言，自动显微镜和手动显微镜的准确性相当，尽管由于自动扫描细胞所必需的放大倍数和手动扫描产生的大量图库图像而必须对其进行检查，因此手动评分更为有效手动。这表明当需要快速分析（即临床情况）时，手动显微镜是优选的。相反，在较少施加时间限制的情况下（即研究情况），自动扫描可能比手动显微镜具有优势。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号