Comparative study of urine sediment elements with fully automated analyzer and the bright field microscope method using Sternheimer Malbin dye / Эрүүл мэндийн лаборатори

Introduction@#The traditional microscopic method is to visually count the elements in the urine, but it is difficult to distinguish between the cells because they are not stained. Sternheimer Malbin staining, on the other hand, contains a variety of dyes that help to distinguish elements in urine sediment, improve the differentiation between cell nuclei and cytoplasm, provide more information about cell shape and image, and make it easier to differentiate kidney disease. @*Objective@#To study the results of the reading of a fully automatic urine sediment analyzer of compared with the Sternheimer Malbin stained bright field microscope method.@*Research materials and methods@#In this study included 150 people who served the MJTH of the MNUMS received permission to participate in the research. The urine sample collected in accordance with the standard operating instructions was counted by a fully automated analyzer and stained with Sternheimer Malbin dye and counted red cells (RBC), white blood cells (WBC), epithelial cells (EC), and renal epithelium (RTEC) under a microscope using a Fuchs-Rosenthal chamber.@*Results@#23.3% (n=35) of the respondents were male, 76.6% (n=115) were female, and the average age was 44.3±11.6. There 16.6% (25)/9.3% (14) of the RBCs were counted in excess of the reference volume when analyzed under an microscope stained with an automated urine sediment analyzer and Sternheimer-Malbin dye. For each WBC method, 45.4% (68)/41 (61)% and EC 24.7% (37)/23.3% (35) were counted above the reference volume. 90% (135)/32% (48) of the total samples were counted in excess of the RTEC reference volume. Comparing the performance of the automatic urine sediment analyzer with the light microscope method, the sensitivity and specificity were RBC-99.8%/99.1%, WBC-99.3%/99.6%, EC-99.7%/99.2, and RTEC-99.1%/99.2%. False-positive and false-negative results were rated for each RBC-99.9%/99.1%, WBC-99.3%/99.6%, EC 99.8%/99.2%, and RTEC-99.7%/99.9%, respectively. The positive likelihood ratio was RBC, WBC, RTEC 1.0, or the test was useless, while the negative likelihood ratio was RBC was very different, WBC was slightly different, EC was very different, and RTEC was very different. Positive and negative predictive value indicators RBC-99.3%/99.4%, WBC-99.4%/99.4%, EC-99.4%/99.5, RTEC-99.2%/99.1%, optimality for RBC, WBC, EC 99.4%, RTEC -99.1%.@*Conclusion@#</br> 1. The results of an automated urine sediment analyzer and a bright field microscope stained by Sternheimer Malbin were similar for red blood cells, white blood cells, and epithelial cells, but different for renal tubular epithelial cells. </br> 2. The resuls UF-5000 analyzer and bright field microscope analysis using Sternheimer Malbin dye were comparable.

Comparison of Red Blood Cell, White Blood Cell and Differential Counts between UF-5000 System and Manual Method

BACKGROUND: Analysis of body fluids provides important information for assessing various medical conditions. We aimed to validate the analytical and diagnostic performance of the Sysmex UF-5000 (Sysmex, Japan) system for the analysis of different body fluids. METHODS: Eighty body fluid samples were analyzed using the UF-5000 system in the body fluid mode and light microscopy. Body fluids included ascitic, pleural, and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), as well as other fluid samples. RESULTS: A comparison between the UF-5000 system and manual counting demonstrated good correlations with regard to red (r=0.6555) and white blood cell (r=0.9666) counts. The UF-5000 system also demonstrated good performance for differential cell counting (r=0.9028). CSF particularly showed a good correlation. CONCLUSIONS: The use of the UF-5000 system for cell counting and differential analysis of body fluid samples might be an effective and automated alternative to chamber counting in laboratory routine analysis, thereby enhancing laboratory workflow and clinical effectiveness.

Selection of Unnecessary Urine Culture Specimens Using Sysmex UF-5000 Urine Flow Cytometer / 대한임상미생물학회지

BACKGROUND: Urine culture is one of the most frequently requested tests in microbiology. Automated urine analyzers yield much infection-related information. The Sysmex UF-5000 analyzer (Sysmex, Japan) is a new flow cytometry urine analyzer capable of quantifying urinary particles, including bacteria, WBCs, and yeast-like cells (YLCs) and can provide a Gram stainability flag. In this work, we evaluated how many unnecessary urine cultures could be screened out using the UF-5000. METHODS: We compared the culture results of 126 urine samples among 453 requested urine cultures (from sources other than the Urology and Nephrology departments) with urinalysis results. Urine cultures were considered positive if bacterial or YLC growth was ≥104 CFUs/mL. RESULTS: We used urinalysis cut-off values of 50/µL and 100/µL for bacteria and YLC, respectively. Forty eight of the 126 (38.1%, or 10.6% of 453 requested) cultures were below these cut-off values and did not contain any culture-positive samples. CONCLUSION: Bacteria and YLC counts generated using the UF-5000 analyzer could be used to screen out negative cultures and reduce urine culture volume by ~10% without sacrificing detection of positive cultures.