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.
