目的 對(duì)ADVIA 2120血液分析儀實(shí)驗(yàn)動(dòng)物白細(xì)胞分類性能進(jìn)行評(píng)價(jià)。方法 將ADVIA 2120血液分析儀常用實(shí)驗(yàn)動(dòng)物白細(xì)胞五項(xiàng)分類結(jié)果與手工鏡檢分類結(jié)果進(jìn)行對(duì)比，運(yùn)用SPSS 17.0軟件對(duì)分類結(jié)果進(jìn)行統(tǒng)計(jì)分析。結(jié)果 除比格犬、Wistar大鼠、食蟹猴嗜堿粒細(xì)胞外，其余各項(xiàng)白細(xì)胞分類結(jié)果儀器分類和手工鏡檢相比無顯著差異（P＞0.05），且相關(guān)性較好（r＞0.9）。結(jié)論 在儀器有白細(xì)胞相關(guān)提示警告時(shí)，無論各項(xiàng)分類指標(biāo)是否在正常范圍，應(yīng)鏡檢為宜。

Objective To evaluate the results of leukocyte classifying counts by ADVIA 2120 Hematology Analyzer. Methods The differential leukocyte counts by ADVIA 2120 Hematology Analyzer were compared with those of manual blood smears under microscopy. The results were analyzed by SPSS 17.0. Results It showed that the relativity of two methods for classification of leukocytes was remarkable (r>0.9) and there was no significant difference (P>0.05) between them, except for the basophils of Beagle’s dogs, Wistar rats, and cynomolgus monkeys. Conclusion The results suggest that when the analyzer warns, it is better to analyze them under microscopy, regardless of whether the classification index in the normal range.