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
. 2013 Jul;27(4):312-6.
doi: 10.1002/jcla.21604.

Comparison of fully automated urine sediment analyzers H800-FUS100 and LabUMat-UriSed with manual microscopy

Hatice Yüksel  1 , Elif Kiliç, Aysun Ekinci, Osman Evliyaoğlu
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Comparison of fully automated urine sediment analyzers H800-FUS100 and LabUMat-UriSed with manual microscopy

Hatice Yüksel et al. J Clin Lab Anal. 2013 Jul.

Abstract

Background: Recent technical developments have focused on the full automation of urinalyses, however the manual microscopic analysis of urine sediment is considered the reference method. The aim of this study was to compare the performances of the LabUMat-UriSed and the H800-FUS100 with manual microscopy, and with each other.

Methods: The urine sediments of 332 urine samples were examined by these two devices (LabUMat-UriSed, H800-FUS100) and manual microscopy.

Results: The reproducibility of the analyzers, UriSed and Fus100 (4.1-28.5% and 4.7-21.2%, respectively), was better than that with manual microscopy (8.5-33.3%). The UriSed was more sensitive for leukocytes (82%), while the Fus-100 was more sensitive for erythrocyte cell counting (73%). There were moderate correlations between manual microscopy and the two devices, UriSed and Fus100, for erythrocyte (r = 0.496 and 0.498, respectively) and leukocyte (r = 0.597 and 0.599, respectively) cell counting however the correlation between the two devices was much better for erythrocyte (r = 0.643) and for leukocyte (r = 0.767) cell counting.

Conclusion: It can be concluded that these two devices showed similar performances. They were time-saving and standardized techniques, especially for reducing preanalytical errors such as the study time, centrifugation, and specimen volume for sedimentary analysis; however, the automated systems are still inadequate for classifying the cells that are present in pathological urine specimens.

Keywords: Automated urine analysis; Fus100; manual urine sediment analysis; urised.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Aspevall O, Hallander H, Gant V, Kouri T. European guidelines for urinalysis: a collaborative document produced by European clinical microbiologists and clinical chemists under ECLM in collaboration with ESCMID. Clin Microbiol Infect 2001;7:173–178. - PubMed
    1. Ono Y, Sugimoto K, Goto M, Kimura M, Kasai T, Shoji M, Yasujima M. Hematuria and acanthocyturia in patients with diabetes. Rinsho Byori 2005;53:993–998. - PubMed
    1. Memişoğulları R, Yüksel H, Yıldırım HA, Yavuz Ö. Performance characteristics of dipstick and microscopic urinalysis for diagnosis of urinary tract infection. Eur J Gen Med 2010;7:174–178.
    1. Simerville JA, Maxted WC, Pahira JJ. Urinalysis: a comprehensive review. Am Fam Physician 2005;71:1153–1162. - PubMed
    1. National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards . Urinalysis and collection, transportation and preservation of urine specimens; approved guideline (NCCLS document GP16‐A). Villanova, PA: NCCLS; 1995. p 51–69.

Publication types