Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Background: Urinalysis includes the physical examination of urine and the examination of formation scores, and the microscopic evaluation of the visible components in urine is a time-consuming process with high labor intensity and requires solid morphological expertise. Objective: To assess the Sysmex UF5000 automatic urine sediment analyzer’s diagnostic capability and contrast its accuracy with UF1000i urine samples. Methods: The precision, contamination rate, linear range, and reportable range of UF5000 were evaluated according to relevant regulations and verification methods provided by manufacturers. Urine samples were detected by UF5000 and UF1000 sediment analyzers, respectively. The accuracy of the false positive rate, false negative rate, sensitivity, and specificity of urine samples detected by the two instruments were compared using the results of centrifugal microscopy as the gold standard. Results: Red blood cells (RBC), White blood cells (WBC), and Epithelial cells (m) were detected by the Sysmex UF5000 urinary sediment analyzer. The intra-batch precision and inter-batch precision of EC), tubular type (CAST) and bacteria (BACT) were all within the required range. The contamination rate and linear range of RBC, WBC, and BACT met the requirements and could be reported widely. The false positive rate of UF5000 RBC was significantly lower than UF1000i, while the false positive rate of CAST was higher than UF1000i, the difference was statistically significant. In UF5000, the false negative rate of MALE WBC was significantly lower than that of females, and the difference was statistically significant. There was no difference in the specificity of white blood cells detected by the two instruments. When compared to UF1000i, UF5000 had much higher specificity for erythrocyte and tube types, and the sensitivity of three commonly used parameters of UF5000 was significantly higher than that of UF1000i, with statistical significance (P < 0.05). Conclusion: Compared with the UF1000i, the UF5000 showed similar or better diagnostic performance on most parameters.
Chunhua et al. (Fri,) studied this question.