Dae-Hyun Ko1, Misuk Ji2, Sollip Kim3, Eun-Jung Cho1, Woochang Lee1, Yeo-Min Yun2, Sail Chun1, Won-Ki Min1. 1. a Department of Laboratory Medicine , University of Ulsan College of Medicine and Asan Medical Center , Seoul ; 2. b Department of Laboratory Medicine , Konkuk University School of Medicine and Medical Center , Seoul ; 3. c Department of Laboratory Medicine , Ilsan Paik Hospital, Inje University College of Medicine , Goyang , Korea.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The results of urine sediment analysis have been reported semiquantitatively. However, as recent guidelines recommend quantitative reporting of urine sediment, and with the development of automated urine sediment analyzers, there is an increasing need for quantitative analysis of urine sediment. Here, we developed a protocol for urine sediment analysis and quantified the results. METHODS: Based on questionnaires, various reports, guidelines, and experimental results, we developed a protocol for urine sediment analysis. The results of this new protocol were compared with those obtained with a standardized chamber and an automated sediment analyzer. Reference intervals were also estimated using new protocol. RESULTS: We developed a protocol with centrifugation at 400 g for 5 min, with the average concentration factor of 30. The correlation between quantitative results of urine sediment analysis, the standardized chamber, and the automated sediment analyzer were generally good. The conversion factor derived from the new protocol showed a better fit with the results of manual count than the default conversion factor in the automated sediment analyzer. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a protocol for manual urine sediment analysis to quantitatively report the results. This protocol may provide a mean for standardization of urine sediment analysis.
INTRODUCTION: The results of urine sediment analysis have been reported semiquantitatively. However, as recent guidelines recommend quantitative reporting of urine sediment, and with the development of automated urine sediment analyzers, there is an increasing need for quantitative analysis of urine sediment. Here, we developed a protocol for urine sediment analysis and quantified the results. METHODS: Based on questionnaires, various reports, guidelines, and experimental results, we developed a protocol for urine sediment analysis. The results of this new protocol were compared with those obtained with a standardized chamber and an automated sediment analyzer. Reference intervals were also estimated using new protocol. RESULTS: We developed a protocol with centrifugation at 400 g for 5 min, with the average concentration factor of 30. The correlation between quantitative results of urine sediment analysis, the standardized chamber, and the automated sediment analyzer were generally good. The conversion factor derived from the new protocol showed a better fit with the results of manual count than the default conversion factor in the automated sediment analyzer. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a protocol for manual urine sediment analysis to quantitatively report the results. This protocol may provide a mean for standardization of urine sediment analysis.
Keywords:
Microscopy; flow cytometry; laboratory routines and automation; laboratory standardization; specimen collection and transportation; urinalysis
Authors: Agnieszka Ćwiklińska; Robert Kowalski; Barbara Kortas-Stempak; Agnieszka Kuchta; Aleksandra Fijałkowska; Gabriela Bednarczuk; Maciej Jankowski Journal: Biochem Med (Zagreb) Date: 2020-06-15 Impact factor: 2.313
Authors: Christa M Cobbaert; Figen Arslan; Imma Caballé Martín; Antoni Alsius Serra; Ester Picó-Plana; Víctor Sánchez-Margalet; Antonio Carmona-Fernández; John Burden; André Ziegler; Walter Bechel Journal: Pract Lab Med Date: 2019-09-19