Stephen Shei-Dei Yang1,2, Chun-Chun Yang3, Yi-Sheng Chen1,2, Shang-Jen Chang4,5. 1. Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Taipei Tzu Chi Hospital, New Taipei, Taiwan. 2. School of Medicine, Tzu Chi University, Hualien, Taiwan. 3. Division of General Laboratory, Taipei Tzu Chi Hospital, New Taipei, Taiwan. 4. Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Taipei Tzu Chi Hospital, New Taipei, Taiwan. krissygnet@gmail.com. 5. School of Medicine, Tzu Chi University, Hualien, Taiwan. krissygnet@gmail.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the performance of the new flow cytometer UF-5000 with the UF-1000i and Gram staining for determining bacterial patterns in urine samples. METHODS: Women who attended our clinic with symptoms suggestive of urinary tract infection were enrolled in the study. Mid-stream urine samples were collected for gram staining, urine analysis and urine cultures. Bacterial patterns were classified using the UF-1000i (none, cocci bacteria or rods/mixed growth), the UF-5000 (none, cocci, rods or mixed growth) and Gram staining. RESULTS: Among the 102 included samples, there were 10 g-positive cocci, 2 g-positive bacilli, 66 g-negative rods, and 24 mixed growth. The sensitivity/specificity of the UF-1000i was 81.8/91.1% for gram-negative rods and 23.5/96.9% for cocci/mixed. The sensitivity/specificity of the UF-5000 was 80.0/88.2% for gram negative rods and 70.0/86.5% for gram-positive cocci. CONCLUSIONS: The UF-5000 demonstrated good sensitivity and specificity for Gram-negative bacilli and demonstrated an improved sensitivity for detecting Gram-positive cocci compared with the UF-1000i.
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the performance of the new flow cytometer UF-5000 with the UF-1000i and Gram staining for determining bacterial patterns in urine samples. METHODS:Women who attended our clinic with symptoms suggestive of urinary tract infection were enrolled in the study. Mid-stream urine samples were collected for gram staining, urine analysis and urine cultures. Bacterial patterns were classified using the UF-1000i (none, cocci bacteria or rods/mixed growth), the UF-5000 (none, cocci, rods or mixed growth) and Gram staining. RESULTS: Among the 102 included samples, there were 10 g-positive cocci, 2 g-positive bacilli, 66 g-negative rods, and 24 mixed growth. The sensitivity/specificity of the UF-1000i was 81.8/91.1% for gram-negative rods and 23.5/96.9% for cocci/mixed. The sensitivity/specificity of the UF-5000 was 80.0/88.2% for gram negative rods and 70.0/86.5% for gram-positive cocci. CONCLUSIONS: The UF-5000 demonstrated good sensitivity and specificity for Gram-negative bacilli and demonstrated an improved sensitivity for detecting Gram-positive cocci compared with the UF-1000i.