The clinical significance of manual microscopy in resolving automated haematology discrepancies: a case study of familial Pelger-Hüet anomaly
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.66636/gmj.v1.i3.a193Keywords:
Pelger-Hüet anomaly, lamin B receptor, neutrophil morphology, automated haematology analyser, left shift, peripheral blood smear, Wright-Giemsa, manual microscopy, band form, hyposegmentationAbstract
Background: Automated haematology analysers classify leucocytes based on quantitative parameters of volume, conductivity, and light scatter. However, this design cannot interpret certain benign hereditary nuclear variants. Pelger-Hüet anomaly (PHA), a hereditary, autosomal-dominant condition arising from mutations in the lamin B receptor (LBR) gene, is frequently misclassified by such platforms as a pathological left shift, since its hyposegmented and densely condensed nuclei present a reduced scatter complexity resembling that of immature band forms.
Case presentation: This case study documents a familial cluster of PHA in two siblings evaluated in Tbilisi, Georgia, with a reported paternal history of the same trait consistent with autosomal-dominant transmission. Peripheral blood smears from both patients were prepared using the standard wedge technique, stained with Wright-Giemsa, and evaluated under oil-immersion microscopy. One hundred neutrophils per patient were classified by nuclear lobe number and chromatin architecture.
Results: Patient 1 showed 94% hyposegmented neutrophils (87% bilobed, 7% monolobed) and Patient 2 showed 96% (91% bilobed, 5% monolobed). The automated five-part differential did not report an independent hyposegmented neutrophil or PHA category for either sample; instead, affected cells were distributed across the neutrophil and band-form channels without a distinguishing flag.
Conclusion: Manual smear evaluation, through assessment of chromatin condensation, nuclear architecture, and cytoplasmic maturity, remains necessary to differentiate benign hereditary PHA from false left-shift misclassification and from the acquired pseudo-Pelger-Hüet anomaly associated with myelodysplastic and malignant myeloid processes. Manual smear review following an automated left-shift flag should be regarded as a primary diagnostic procedure, not a supplementary step.
Keywords: Pelger-Hüet anomaly; lamin B receptor; neutrophil morphology; automated haematology analyser; left shift; peripheral blood smear; Wright-Giemsa; manual microscopy; band form; hyposegmentation
References
1. George-Gay B, Parker K. Understanding the complete blood count with differential. J PeriAnesth Nurs. 2003;18(2):96–117. https://doi.org/10.1053/jpan.2003.50013
2. Pelger K. Demonstrate van een paar zeldzaam voorkomende typen van bloedlichaampjes en bespreking der patienten. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 1928;72:1178.
3. Huët GJ. Familiaire anomalie der leucocyten. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 1931;75:5956–5959.
4. Hoffmann K, Dreger CK, Olins AL, Olins DE, Shultz LD, Lucke B, et al. Mutations in the gene encoding the lamin B receptor produce an altered nuclear morphology in granulocytes (Pelger–Huët anomaly). Nat Genet. 2002;31(4):410–414. https://doi.org/10.1038/ng925
5. Ayan MS, Abdelrahman AAM, Khanal N, Elsallabi OS, Birch NC. Case of acquired or pseudo-Pelger-Huët anomaly. Oxf Med Case Reports. 2015;2015(4):248–250. https://doi.org/10.1093/omcr/omv025
6. Cunningham JM, Patnaik MM, Hammerschmidt DE, Vercellotti GM. Historical perspective and clinical implications of the Pelger-Huet cell. Am J Hematol. 2009;84(2):116–119. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajh.21320
7. Cornbleet PJ. Clinical utility of the band count. Clin Lab Med. 2002;22(1):101–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0272-2712(03)00069-6
8. World Veterinary Service Academy. Evaluating a blood smear [Diagram]. WVS Academy; 2026. https://wvs.academy/learn/companion-animals/practical-pathology/haematology/blood-smears/evaluating-a-blood-smear
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Giorgi Tkeshelashvili

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This article is published open access under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) licence.
You are free to: share and adapt the work for any purpose, even commercially.
Conditions: provide appropriate credit to the authors and the Georgian Medical Journal (GMJ), link to the licence, and indicate if changes were made. Do not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the licence permits.
Licence: creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 · Legal code: creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Third-party material. Images or other content credited to a third party are not covered by CC BY 4.0; permission must be obtained from the rights holder for reuse beyond statutory exceptions.
Authors' rights. Authors retain copyright. First publication rights are granted to GMJ.
Data and code. Where provided, datasets or code may carry their own licences; please follow the licence stated in the article or repository record.




















