Automatic microscopic count and characterization of cerebrospinal fluid cells: an alternative to standardized analysis

Abstract Objectives Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) analysis is important for the diagnosis and follow-up of central nervous system diseases. In this study, we propose a cellular analysis of CSF by digital optical microscopy (OM) using a semi-automatic instrument (SediMAX Lite, Menarini Diagnostic) that evaluates cells and produces digital images. Methods A total of 110 CSF samples were analyzed (70 from the General Laboratory of the Careggi University Hospital in Florence and 40 from the Clinical-Chemical Analysis Laboratory of the San Donato Hospital in Arezzo). Manual OM cell counts were performed in a manual OM counting chamber. For semi-automatic cell counting, the SediMAX Lite was used, which captured 15 digital images for each sample (treated and untreated with Turk staining), stored in the instrument database. Method comparison and instrument evaluation were performed. Results The agreement between the OM manual and SediMAX Lite for RBC showed a kappa=0.80, while for WBC count was kappa=0.86. The Passing-Bablok regression slope, in the comparison of WBC counts between the two methods in samples non-pretreated with Türk’s fluid, was 0.94 (95 % CI 0.86 to 1.00) and intercept was 1.00 (95 % CI, 0.00–1.00). The Bland-Altman bias was 4.39 cells/µL (95 % CI, −4.27 to 13.05), lower limit bias was −82.89 cells/µL (95 % CI, −97.89 to −67.89) and upper limit was 91.68 cells/µL (95 % CI, 76.68 to 106.68). Comparison of WBC counts between the two methods in samples pretreated with Türk’s fluid showed at the Passing-Bablok regression slope was 1.29 (95 % CI 1.16 to 1.44) and intercept was 1.00 (95 % CI, 0.56–1.00). The Bland-Altman bias was −22.12 cells/µL (95 % CI, −36.92 to −7.32), lower limit bias was −171.24 cells/µL (95 % CI, −196.87 to −145.61) and upper limit was 127.00 cells/µL (95 % CI, 101.38 to 152.63). Conclusions SediMAX Lite shows quantitative agreement is limited, particularly in low cellularity samples. The system may serve as a supportive tool for standardized digital imaging and qualitative identification of pleocytosis in laboratories requiring continuous availability.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Advances in Laboratory Medicine / Avances en Medicina de Laboratorio
Published
2026-10-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1515/almed-2026-0128
Primary Topic
Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Automatic microscopic count and characterization of cerebrospinal fluid cells: an alternative to standardized analysis

Agostino Ognibene, Alessandra Fanelli, Tiziana Biagioli, Andrea Alberto Conti et al.
Advances in Laboratory Medicine / Avances en Medicina de Laboratorio
Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
article

Automatic microscopic count and characterization of cerebrospinal fluid cells: an alternative to standardized analysis

Agostino Ognibene, Alessandra Fanelli, Tiziana Biagioli, Andrea Alberto Conti, Maria Lorubbio, Marco Brogi, Benedetta Salvadori
article en

Abstract

Abstract Objectives Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) analysis is important for the diagnosis and follow-up of central nervous system diseases. In this study, we propose a cellular analysis of CSF by digital optical microscopy (OM) using a semi-automatic instrument (SediMAX Lite, Menarini Diagnostic) that evaluates cells and produces digital images. Methods A total of 110 CSF samples were analyzed (70 from the General Laboratory of the Careggi University Hospital in Florence and 40 from the Clinical-Chemical Analysis Laboratory of the San Donato Hospital in Arezzo). Manual OM cell counts were performed in a manual OM counting chamber. For semi-automatic cell counting, the SediMAX Lite was used, which captured 15 digital images for each sample (treated and untreated with Turk staining), stored in the instrument database. Method comparison and instrument evaluation were performed. Results The agreement between the OM manual and SediMAX Lite for RBC showed a kappa=0.80, while for WBC count was kappa=0.86. The Passing-Bablok regression slope, in the comparison of WBC counts between the two methods in samples non-pretreated with Türk’s fluid, was 0.94 (95 % CI 0.86 to 1.00) and intercept was 1.00 (95 % CI, 0.00–1.00). The Bland-Altman bias was 4.39 cells/µL (95 % CI, −4.27 to 13.05), lower limit bias was −82.89 cells/µL (95 % CI, −97.89 to −67.89) and upper limit was 91.68 cells/µL (95 % CI, 76.68 to 106.68). Comparison of WBC counts between the two methods in samples pretreated with Türk’s fluid showed at the Passing-Bablok regression slope was 1.29 (95 % CI 1.16 to 1.44) and intercept was 1.00 (95 % CI, 0.56–1.00). The Bland-Altman bias was −22.12 cells/µL (95 % CI, −36.92 to −7.32), lower limit bias was −171.24 cells/µL (95 % CI, −196.87 to −145.61) and upper limit was 127.00 cells/µL (95 % CI, 101.38 to 152.63). Conclusions SediMAX Lite shows quantitative agreement is limited, particularly in low cellularity samples. The system may serve as a supportive tool for standardized digital imaging and qualitative identification of pleocytosis in laboratories requiring continuous availability.

Advances in Laboratory Medicine / Avances en Medicina de Laboratorio
Azienda Usl 8 Arezzo (IT), Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi (IT), Ospedale San Donato (IT), University of Florence (IT)
Openalex Percentile: Top 13%
Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.