Comparison of the reliability of Gram-negative and Gram-positive flags of the Sysmex UF-5000 with manual Gram stain and urine culture results.

OBJECTIVES: Recently, the fully automated flow cytometry-based UF-5000 (Sysmex Corboration, Kobe, Japan) urine sediment analyzer was developed providing bacteria (BACT) info flags for more accurate bacterial discrimination of urinary tract infections (UTIs). This study aimed to compare the reliability of the UF-5000 BACT-info flags with manual Gram stain and urine culture as the gold standard method. METHODS: A total of 344 urine samples were analyzed on the UF-5000 and compared with manual microscopic Gram stain and urine cultures. Agreement was assessed by Cohen's kappa (κ) analysis. The Youden index was used to determine the optimal BACT and white blood cell (WBC) cut-off points for discriminating positive and negative urine cultures. RESULTS: Overall 98/344 (28.5%) samples were urine culture positive at a cut-off of ≥105 CFU/mL. "Gram-negative?" UF-5000 BACT-Info flags showed a better concordance of 25/40 (62.5%) with urine culture compared to Gram stain with 30/50 (60%). The results for UF-5000 discrimination of Gram-positive and Gram-negative microorganisms demonstrated a substantial (κ = 0.78) and fair (κ = 0.40) agreement with urine culture. Optimal cut-off points detecting positive urine cultures were 135 BACT/µL (sensitivity [SE]: 92.1%, specificity [SP]: 85.4%, positive predictive value [PPV]: 71%, negative predictive value [NPV]: 96%) and 23 WBC/µL (SE: 73.5%, SP: 84.1%, PPV: 65%, NPV: 89%). CONCLUSIONS: The UF-5000 analyzer (Sysmex) is a reliable diagnostic tool for UTI screening. The displayed BACT-Info flags allow a quick diagnostic orientation for the clinician. However, the authors suggest verifying the automated Gram categories with urine culture.

Comparison of the diagnostic performance of two automated urine sediment analyzers with manual phase-contrast microscopy.

Background Recently, several manufacturers have launched automated urinalysis platforms. This study aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of the UF-5000 (Sysmex Corporation, Kobe, Japan) and the cobas® u 701 (Roche Diagnostics, Rotkreuz, Switzerland) urine sediment analyzers with manual phase-contrast microscopy as the reference method. Methods A total of 195 urine samples were analyzed on both automated platforms and subjected to manual microscopic examination. Agreement was assessed by Cohen's kappa (κ) analysis. Sensitivities and specificities were calculated. Results The agreement of the UF-5000 with manual microscopy was almost perfect (κ > 0.8) for red (RBC) and white blood cells (WBC), renal tubular epithel cells, hyaline casts, bacteria (BACT) and yeast (YLC), substantial (κ = 0.61-0.80) for squamous epithel cells (SEC) and pathologic casts, and moderate (κ = 0.41-0.60) for transitional epithel cells. The cobas® u 701 showed substantial agreement (κ = 0.61-0.80) for WBC, moderate agreement (κ = 0.41-0.60) for hyaline casts, and fair agreement (κ = 0.21-0.40) for RBC, SEC, non-squamous epithel (NEC), pathologic casts, BACT and YLC. The UF-5000 sensitivities ranged between 98.5% for RBC and 83.3% for pathological casts. The cobas® u 701 showed sensitivities between 83.0% for WBC and 31.6% for YLC. Conclusions The UF-5000 (Sysmex) analyzer showed a better diagnostic agreement with manual phase-contrast microscopy compared to the cobas® u 701 (Roche) module. The Sysmex platform showed reliable results for urine sediment analysis. However, pathological samples should be verified with manual microscopy.