摘要：目的 通过比对野战检验装备血细胞分析仪AC-910EO+和实验室常规使用的sysmex XN-2000，评价两种血细胞分析仪检测结果的一致性。方法 按照美国临床实验室标准委员会（NCCLS）EP9-A的要求，以XN-2000为仪器，以AC- 910EO+为待评仪器，分别对40例患者的EDTA抗凝的静脉血进行全血细胞分析，对两台仪器就WBC、RBC、HGB和PLT4个主要指标进行方法比对和偏移估计。结果 两台仪器在WBC、RBC和HGB这3项指标上具有很好的相关性，其回归方程及相关系数分别为Y=0.984X-0.164（r=0.999）、Y=0.986X+0.102（r=0.998）、Y=1.027X+0.256（r=0.998），而且他们在各医学决定水平浓度的预期偏差均符合CLIA，88的标准，能够为临床所接受；但PLT这个指标两台仪器的回归方程为Y=0.804X+47.521相关系数为r=0.965，且在医学决定水平浓度的预期偏差除高值外均不能为临床所接受。结论 野战检验装备AC-910 EO+能够用于执行野战卫生保障任务，但PLT的检测结果应该客观分析，仅能作为临床参考。

ABSTRACT: Objective To evaluate the performance of field operation clinical laboratory equipment AC-910 EO+. Methods According to the standards of NCCLS EP9-A files, the four principal indexes of WBC, RBC, HGB and PLT in 40 patients were detected by haemocyte analyzer AC- 910EO+ and XN-2000 used as reference analyzer respectively. Results There was good correlation between the two analyzers on WBC, RBC and HGB detection. The expected bias of the results at the points of medical science determination levels were accord with the standard of CLIA，88, and acceptable by clinic. The bad results on PLT analysis between two analyzer were obtained and the expected bias of the results at the points of medical science determination levels was not acceptable by clinic. Conclusion The field operation clinical laboratory equipment AC-910 EO+ might be able to ensure field operation for public health mission, but the result of PLT should be analyzed objectively and used as a clinical reference only.