The differential diagnostic value of erythrocyte parameter calculation formula and erythrocyte morphology integral in thalassemia trait and iron deficiency anemia
10.3760/cma.j.cn231583-20240603-00144
- VernacularTitle:红细胞参数计算公式+红细胞形态学积分在地中海贫血和缺铁性贫血中的鉴别价值
- Author:
Tiantian LU
1
;
Weiming MO
1
;
Guomei SHI
1
Author Information
1. 杭州师范大学附属萧山医院检验科，杭州 311202
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Thalassemia;
Iron deficiency anemia;
Erythrocyte parameter calculation formula;
Erythrocyte morphology integral;
Differential diagnosis
- From:
Chinese Journal of Endemiology
2025;44(2):106-111
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:This study aims to assess the utility of erythrocyte parameter calculation formula in combination with erythrocyte morphology integral in distinguishing thalassemia trait (TT) and iron deficiency anemia (IDA).Methods:A total of 103 cases of TT and 101 cases of IDA diagnosed from August 2021 to December 2023 were collected as retrospective study subjects at Xiaoshan Hospital Affiliated to Hangzhou Normal University, the differences in TT genotype and erythrocyte parameter detection results were analyzed. The diagnostic efficacy of the erythrocyte parameter calculation formula Matos & Carvalho Index (MCI formula) and the MCI formula + erythrocyte morphology integral in screening TT was evaluated, respectively. Receiver operating characteristic curve was plotted, and diagnostic cut-off points were set according to the principle of maximum Jorden index to evaluate the diagnostic specificity and sensitivity of the two screening methods.Results:A total of 40 cases of α-TT and 59 cases of β-TT were detected. Compared with the IDA group, there were statistically significant differences in erythrocyte parameters such as erythrocyte count (RBC), hemoglobin (HGB), hematocrit (HCT), mean corpuscular hemoglobin (MCH), mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration (MCHC), and red cell volume distribution width (RDW) in the TT group ( t = 8.96, 10.03, 7.48, 3.88, 12.07, - 6.20, P < 0.001), but there was no statistically significant difference in mean corpuscular volume (MCV, t = - 0.47, P = 0.639). There were statistically significant differences in RBC, HGB, HCT, and MCHC between α-TT and β-TT groups ( t = 2.27, 3.57, 4.28, - 2.00, P < 0.05), but there were no significant differences in MCV, MCH, and RDW ( t = 1.86, 1.05, - 1.18, P > 0.05). The calculated value of MCI formula + erythrocyte morphology integral in TT group (24.69 ± 1.78) was significantly higher than that in IDA group (21.03 ± 1.66, t = 15.15, P < 0.001). The area under the curve (AUC) of MCI formula + erythrocyte morphology integral was 0.946, and the AUC of MCI formula was 0.904. When the diagnostic cut-off point of MCI formula + erythrocyte morphology integral was 22.790, the sensitivity was 91.30%, which was better than that of MCI formula (76.70%), and the difference was statistically significant (χ 2 = 7.29, P = 0.007). There was no statistically significant difference in its specificity (89.10%) compared to the MCI formula (89.10%, χ 2 = 0.00, P > 0.999). Conclusion:The erythrocyte parameter calculation formula and the erythrocyte morphology integral has great application value in differentiating TT and IDA.
