These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Urine particles analysis: performance evaluation of Sysmex UF-1000i and comparison among urine flow cytometer, dipstick, and visual microscopic examination.
    Author: Jiang T, Chen P, Ouyang J, Zhang S, Cai D.
    Journal: Scand J Clin Lab Invest; 2011 Feb; 71(1):30-7. PubMed ID: 21091139.
    Abstract:
    INTRODUCTION: Our objective was to evaluate a newly invented urine flow cytometer, and select an optimal strategy for urinalysis in clinical practice. METHODS: The performance of UF-1000i was evaluated in both control material and patient samples. A total of 1631 specimens were collected and analysed by visual microscopy examination (VME), UF-1000i flow cytometer (Sysmex Medical Electronics Co, Kobe, Japan) and an automated dipstick reflectometer Clinitek Atlas (Bayer Corp, Elkhart, USA). RESULTS: UF-1000i showed good imprecision performance for the main parameters in urine particles with CV values less than 20%. The results from UF-1000i correlated well with VME for erythrocytes (r = 0.96), leukocytes (r = 0.98), and epithelial cell (r = 0.84). The area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) was 0.879, 0.903, 0.783, and 0.817 respectively for erythrocytes, leukocytes, bacteria and CAST in UF-1000i. While in Clinitek Atlas, the AUC was 0.848, 0.803, 0.761, and 0.754 respectively. Sensitivity of combination of the two methods for screening remained at 98% as compared to VME alone, while reducing the visual review rate down to 40%. CONCLUSION: UF-1000i is capable of reproducible measurement of urine particles in the clinically relevant range and shows its advantage over Atlas. Combination of the two methods is an optimal strategy for urine sample screening.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]