Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2010;24(2):67-71.
doi: 10.1002/jcla.20319.

New generation IQ-200 automated urine microscopy analyzer compared with KOVA cell chamber

Affiliations
Comparative Study

New generation IQ-200 automated urine microscopy analyzer compared with KOVA cell chamber

Emel Altekin et al. J Clin Lab Anal. 2010.

Abstract

Objective: The examination of the urine remains to be one of the most commonly performed tests in laboratory practice. Currently, laboratories also need to accredit their urine diagnostics by comparing their measurement methods to acceptable references. In this study we compared particle counts obtained by new generation automated technique, image capture analysis (IQ-200) with those of a standardized chamber counts.

Design and methods: The same 258 urine samples from different departments of a hospital assayed by IQ-200 were analyzed in parallel with the KOVA cell chamber system. Clinically significant discrepancy results (positive vs. negative) for red blood cell (RBC) and white blood cell (WBC) were also compared with those obtained by dipstick testing.

Results: There was a good agreement between the automated system and sediment microscopy for RBCs, WBCs, and squamous epithelial cells (SCs) (r=0.90; r=0.80; r=0.72, respectively: P<0.001). The IQ-200 was more sensitive for determining RBCs, WBCs, and SCs than other formed elements.

Conclusions: IQ-200 can perform accurate quantification of microscopic element in urine. However, automated techniques are not completely free of error. Therefore, by adopting an appropriate algorithm and combining the results with stript analysis and other laboratory tests allows further reduction of clinically important errors.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Mahon CR, Smith LA. Standardization of the urine microscopic examination. Clin Lab Sci 1990;3:328–332. - PubMed
    1. National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards . Urinalysis and collection, transportation and preservation of urine specimens; approved guideline. NCCLS document GP 16‐A. Wayne, PA, NCCLS. 1995.
    1. European urinalysis guidelines, summary. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 2000;60:1–96. - PubMed
    1. Kouri TT, Kahkonen U, Malminiemi K, Vuento R, Rowan RM. Evaluation of Sysmex UF‐100 urine flow cytometer vs chamber counting of supravitally stained specimens and conventional bacterial cultures. Am J Clin Pathol 1999;112:25–35. - PubMed
    1. Alves L, Ballester F, Camps J, Joven J. Preliminary evaluation of the Iris IQ™ 200 automated urine analyser. Clin Chem Lab Med 2005;43:967–970. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms