Family practice · 2021
The accuracy of mean corpuscular volume guided anaemia classification in primary care.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Schop Annemarie, Stouten Karlijn, Riedl Jürgen A, van Houten Ron J, Leening Maarten J G, Bindels Patrick J E, Levin Mark-David
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Anemia can be categorized into micro-, normo- or macrocytic anemia based on the mean corpuscular volume (MCV). This categorization might help to define the etiology of anemia.
METHODS: The cohort consisted of patients newly diagnosed with anaemia in primary care. Seven aetiologies of anaemia were defined, based on an extensive laboratory protocol. Two assumptions were tested: (i) MCV <80 fl (microcytic) excludes vitamin B12 deficiency, folic acid deficiency, suspected haemolysis and suspected bone marrow disease as anaemia aetiology. (ii) MCV >100 fl (macrocytic) excludes iron deficiency anaemia, anaemia of chronic disease and renal anaemia as anaemia aetiology.
RESULTS: Data of 4129 patients were analysed. One anaemia aetiology could be assigned to 2422 (59%) patients, more than one anaemia aetiology to 888 (22%) patients and uncertainty regarding the aetiology remained in 819 (20%) patients. MCV values were within the normal range in 3505 patients (85%). In 59 of 365 microcytic patients (16%), the anaemia aetiology was not in accordance with the first assumption. In 233 of 259 macrocytic patients (90%), the anaemia aetiology was not in accordance with the second assumption.
CONCLUSIONS: Anaemia aetiologies might be ruled out incorrectly if MCV guided classification is used as a first step in the diagnostic work-up of anaemia. We recommend using a broader set of laboratory tests, independent of MCV.
METHODS: The cohort consisted of patients newly diagnosed with anaemia in primary care. Seven aetiologies of anaemia were defined, based on an extensive laboratory protocol. Two assumptions were tested: (i) MCV <80 fl (microcytic) excludes vitamin B12 deficiency, folic acid deficiency, suspected haemolysis and suspected bone marrow disease as anaemia aetiology. (ii) MCV >100 fl (macrocytic) excludes iron deficiency anaemia, anaemia of chronic disease and renal anaemia as anaemia aetiology.
RESULTS: Data of 4129 patients were analysed. One anaemia aetiology could be assigned to 2422 (59%) patients, more than one anaemia aetiology to 888 (22%) patients and uncertainty regarding the aetiology remained in 819 (20%) patients. MCV values were within the normal range in 3505 patients (85%). In 59 of 365 microcytic patients (16%), the anaemia aetiology was not in accordance with the first assumption. In 233 of 259 macrocytic patients (90%), the anaemia aetiology was not in accordance with the second assumption.
CONCLUSIONS: Anaemia aetiologies might be ruled out incorrectly if MCV guided classification is used as a first step in the diagnostic work-up of anaemia. We recommend using a broader set of laboratory tests, independent of MCV.