The flow cytometric diagnosis of AML: Difference between revisions
From haematologyetc.co.uk
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
'''1.''' ''' | '''1.''' '''AML blasts will generally show flow cytometric features consistent with their primitive nature'''</br> | ||
[[Image:AML M1.png|130px]] Blast cells typically have "primitive" morphology, the initial procedure is to ensure that the cells also express markers of early differentiation | [[Image:AML M1.png|130px]] Blast cells typically have "primitive" morphology, the initial procedure is to ensure that the cells also express markers of early differentiation | ||
Revision as of 17:22, 17 December 2023
For most cases, the diagnosis of AML by flow cytometry is relatively straightforward. The problem lies in atypical cases and unusual diagnoses that may be missed.
1. AML blasts will generally show flow cytometric features consistent with their primitive nature
Blast cells typically have "primitive" morphology, the initial procedure is to ensure that the cells also express markers of early differentiation
- Most often in AML useful features of immature cells are weak expression of CD45, and expression of CD34 and/or CD117. However, other markers may be useful (See Click for more detailed description)
- Note that some cases there may be atypical features where primitive nature is less clear, this is most frequently encountered in more mature monocytic cases of AML or in APL, but also in other circumstances (Click for a more detailed description)
Can we confirm myeloid nature?
- Typical cases can generally be recognised by (see table for details)
- Atypical cases can still be identified based on a minimal feature set (see table for details)
- In unusual cases an extended marker panel may allow lineage assignment (see Table for details)
Are there atypical features?
- Expected abberency
- Feature that may give concern