The accuracy of mean corpuscular volume guided anaemia classification in primary care.
prospective_cohort · Level II
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 34345918.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1093/fampra/cmab034.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Anemia can be categorized into micro-, normo- or macrocytic anemia based on the mean corpuscular volume (MCV). This categorization might help to define the etiology of anemia. METHODS: The cohort consisted of patients newly diagnosed with anaemia in primary care. Seven aetiologies of anaemia were defined, based on an extensive laboratory protocol. Two assumptions were tested: (i) MCV <80 fl (microcytic) excludes vitamin B12 deficiency, folic acid deficiency, suspected haemolysis and suspected bone marrow disease as anaemia aetiology. (ii) MCV >100 fl (macrocytic) excludes iron deficiency anaemia, anaemia of chronic disease and renal anaemia as anaemia aetiology. RESULTS: Data of 4129 patients were analysed. One anaemia aetiology could be assigned to 2422 (59%) patients, more than one anaemia aetiology to 888 (22%) patients and uncertainty regarding the aetiology remained in 819 (20%) patients. MCV values were within the normal range in 3505 patients (85%). In 59 of 365 microcytic patients (16%), the anaemia aetiology was not in accordance with the first assumption. In 233 of 259 macrocytic patients (90%), the anaemia aetiology was not in accordance with the second assumption. CONCLUSIONS: Anaemia aetiologies might be ruled out incorrectly if MCV guided classification is used as a first step in the diagnostic work-up of anaemia. We recommend using a broader set of laboratory tests, independent of MCV.