You have to be registered and logged in for purchasing articles.


Clinical Laboratory Urine Analysis: Comparison of the UriSed Automated Microscopic Analyzer and the Manual Microscopy by Junlong Ma, Chengbin Wang, Jiaxin Yue, Mianyang Li, Hongrui Zhang, Xiaojing Ma, Xincui Li, Dandan Xue, Xiaoyan Qing

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, carryover, and method comparison were carried out. A total of 600 urine samples sent for urinalysis were assessed using the UriSed auto-mated 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 carryover. RBC, WBC, and squamous epithelial cells with sensi-tivities and specificities were more than 80% in this study.
Conclusions: There is substantial agreement between the UriSed automated microscop-ic analyzer and the manual microscopy methods. The UriSed provides for a rapid turn-around time.

DOI: 10.7754/Clin.Lab.2013.121128