Comparison of neutrophil respiratory oxidative burst activity between flow cytometry using dihydrorhodamine (DHR) 123 and conventional nitroblue tetrazolium test (NBT)

Authors

  • Nurasyikin Yusof Departments of Patholog & Diagnostic Laboratory Services, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
  • Norafiza Mohd Yasin Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Medical Centre, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Institute for Medical Research
  • Rabeya Yousuf Department of Diagnostic Laboratory Services, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
  • Asrul Abdul Wahab Department of Microbiology. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
  • Suria Abdul Aziz Departments of Pathology& Diagnostic Laboratory Services. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3329/bjms.v21i3.59577

Keywords:

Dihydrorhodamine 123; ntrobluetetrazolium test; phagocytic burst activity; neutrophils function

Abstract

Background: Neutrophil plays a defense role against bacteria and fungi specifically by the neutrophil phagoburst activity. The nitroblue tetrazolium (NBT) test is the gold standard method to measure this but the flow cytometry assays also have been developed. The aim of the study was to evaluate the performance of flow cytometry using Dihydrorhodamine (DHR) 123 and to compare with the conventional NBT test.

Methods: This study was carried out to determine the phagoburst activity at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Medical Centre on 26 normal healthy donors and 5 chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) patients using both methods.

Results: In flow cytometry, higher fluorescence intensity was observed in Phorbol myristate acetate (PMA) stimulated neutrophils. Comparing the mean fluorescent intensity (MFI) between CML and healthy donor showed CML patients have significant lower MFI (312.15 vs 738.22; p<0.05) indicating poorer respiratory burst in CML patients. The PMA stimulated positive cells were higher in flow cytometry than the NBT (98.06% vs 87.5%). Although there was poor correlation between two methods, a good agreement between flow cytometry assay and NBT test results was observed in terms of positive and negative results in simulated and unstimulated cells. Moreover, in flow cytometry, >95% of stimulated cells suggest the higher sensitivity. All samples with negative NBT showed negative DHR, reflecting high degree of agreement between these two methods and eliminating possible false negative result in flow cytometry.

Conclusion: This study showed that flow cytometry assay has superior technical advantages compared to NBT test as it is easy to perform, quick, more sensitive and requires only a small amount of blood sample.

Bangladesh Journal of Medical Science Vol. 21 No. 03 July’22 Page: 626-633

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
Abstract
108
PDF
72

Downloads

Published

2022-05-21

How to Cite

Yusof, N. ., Yasin, N. M. ., Yousuf, R. ., Wahab, A. A. ., & Aziz, S. A. . (2022). Comparison of neutrophil respiratory oxidative burst activity between flow cytometry using dihydrorhodamine (DHR) 123 and conventional nitroblue tetrazolium test (NBT). Bangladesh Journal of Medical Science, 21(3), 626–633. https://doi.org/10.3329/bjms.v21i3.59577

Issue

Vol. 21 No. 3 (2022)

Section

Original Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2022 Nurasyikin Yusof, Norafiza Mohd Yasin, Rabeya Yousuf, Asrul Abdul Wahab, Suria Abdul Aziz

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish in the Bangladesh Journal of Medical Science agree to the following terms that:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant Bangladesh Journal of Medical Science the right of first publication of the work.

  2. Creative Commons Licence
    Articles in Bangladesh Journal of Medical Science are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License CC BY-4.0.This license permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
  3. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  4. Authors are permitted to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as greater citation of published work.