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: Clinical laboratory urine analysis: comparison of the UriSed automated microscopic analyzer and the manual microscopy.
    Author: Ma J, Wang C, Yue J, Li M, Zhang H, Ma X, Li X, Xue D, Qing X, Wang S, Xiang D, Cong Y.
    Journal: Clin Lab; 2013; 59(11-12):1297-303. PubMed ID: 24409664.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Several automated urine sediment analyzers have been introduced to clinical laboratories. Automated microscopic pattern recognition is a new technique for urine particle analysis. We evaluated the analytical and diagnostic performance of the UriSed automated microscopic analyzer and compared with manual microscopy for urine sediment analysis. METHODS: Precision, linearity, carry-over, and method comparison were carried out. A total of 600 urine samples sent for urinalysis were assessed using the UriSed automated microscopic analyzer and manual microscopy. RESULTS: Within-run and between-run precision of the UriSed for red blood cells (RBC) and white blood cells (WBC) were acceptable at all levels (CV < 20%). Within-run and between-run imprecision of the UriSed testing for cast, squamous epithelial cells (EPI), and bacteria (BAC) were good at middle level and high level (CV < 20%). The linearity analysis revealed substantial agreement between the measured value and the theoretical value of the UriSed for RBC, WBC, cast, EPI, and BAC (r > 0.95). There was no carry-over. RBC, WBC, and squamous epithelial cells with sensitivities and specificities were more than 80% in this study. CONCLUSIONS: There is substantial agreement between the UriSed automated microscopic analyzer and the manual microscopy methods. The UriSed provides for a rapid turnaround time.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]