4.7 Article

Use of Complete Blood Cell Count Components to Screen for Hereditary Spherocytosis in Neonates

Journal

PEDIATRICS
Volume 148, Issue 3, Pages -

Publisher

AMER ACAD PEDIATRICS
DOI: 10.1542/peds.2020-021642

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study evaluated the utility of the neonatal HS index in a diverse population and found that it had limited ability to alter the probability of HS, with the best discrimination among infants with TSB levels <10 mg/dL.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The neonatal hereditary spherocytosis (HS) index, defined as the mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration divided by the mean corpuscular volume, has been proposed as a screening tool for HS in neonates. In a population of mostly white infants, an HS Index >0.36 was 97% sensitive and >99% specific. We evaluated the utility of the HS Index among a more racially and ethnically diverse population and determined if its discrimination varies with total serum bilirubin (TSB) levels. METHODS: Infants born at >= 35 weeks' gestation at 15 Kaiser Permanente Northern California hospitals from 1995 to 2015 were eligible (N 5 670 272). Erythrocyte indices from the first complete blood count drawn at <= 7 days and TSB levels drawn at <= 30 days were obtained. Diagnoses of HS were confirmed via chart review. RESULTS: HS was confirmed in 79 infants, 1.2 per 10 000. HS was more common among infants of white and other race or ethnicity and among those with higher peak TSB levels. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for the HS Index was 0.84 (95% confidence interval 0.78-0.90). Likelihood ratios ranged from 10.1 for an HS Index >= 0.380 to 0.1 for an HS Index <0.310. Dichotomized at 0.36, the HS Index was 56% sensitive and 93% specific. Discrimination of the HS Index appeared best among infants with TSB levels < 10 mg/dL. CONCLUSIONS: The HS Index, when obtained from a CBC drawn within the first week after birth, had only modest ability to alter the probability of HS.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available