Publication:
Urine sediment examination: A comparison between the manual method and the iQ200 automated urine microscopy analyzer

dc.contributor.authorPornvaree Lamchiagdhaseen_US
dc.contributor.authorKrisana Preechaborisutkulen_US
dc.contributor.authorPitimon Lomsomboonen_US
dc.contributor.authorPimpawee Srisucharten_US
dc.contributor.authorPornsri Tantinitien_US
dc.contributor.authorNongnute Khan-U-Raen_US
dc.contributor.authorBoonsong Preechaborisutkulen_US
dc.contributor.otherMahidol Universityen_US
dc.contributor.otherB.B. Holding Company Ltd.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2018-06-21T08:08:36Z
dc.date.available2018-06-21T08:08:36Z
dc.date.issued2005-08-01en_US
dc.description.abstractBackground: Microscopic examination of the urine sediment is an essential part in the evaluation of renal and urinary tract diseases. Traditionally, manual microscopic techniques have several methodological steps that may contribute to imprecision, inaccuracy, and are time-consuming. Recently, the iQ200 automated urine microscopy analyzer has been introduced to analyze the unspun urine, thereby improving accuracy, precision and throughput. Methods: In this study, we compared its performance with manual routine slide and chamber counts. Fresh urine samples were obtained from 400 subjects. Results: The reference values of white blood cells, red blood cells and squamous epithelial cells obtained by the above methods were not significant difference when the results reported as cells per high-power field. For the specimens of patients (n = 280), a significant correlation was found when the iQ200 results of cellular elements were compared with those obtained from manual microscopy. No significant difference was found when the post-review results of the iQ200 were compared with the chamber count. However, the presence of casts, crystals, bacteria, and budding yeast needs further characterization under the microscope. Conclusions: There is substantial agreement between the iQ200 and manual microscopic methods. The iQ200 provides for a rapid turnaround time. © 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.en_US
dc.identifier.citationClinica Chimica Acta. Vol.358, No.1-2 (2005), 167-174en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.cccn.2005.02.021en_US
dc.identifier.issn00098981en_US
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-22044436110en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/16309
dc.rightsMahidol Universityen_US
dc.rights.holderSCOPUSen_US
dc.source.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=22044436110&origin=inwarden_US
dc.subjectBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biologyen_US
dc.titleUrine sediment examination: A comparison between the manual method and the iQ200 automated urine microscopy analyzeren_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dspace.entity.typePublication
mu.datasource.scopushttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=22044436110&origin=inwarden_US

Files

Collections