Abstract
IntroductionUrine screening is achieved by either automated or manual microscopic analysis. The aim of the study was to compare Cobas 6500 and Iris IQ200 urine analyzers, and manual urine microscopic analysis.Materials and methodsA total of 540 urine samples sent to the laboratory for chemical and sediment analysis were analyzed on Cobas 6500 and Iris IQ200 within 1 hour from sampling. One hundred and fifty three samples were found to have pathological sediment results and were subjected to manual microscopic analysis performed by laboratory staff blinded to the study. Spearman’s and Gamma statistics were used for correlation analyses, and the McNemar test for the comparison of the two automated analyzers.ResultsThe comparison of Cobas u701 to the manual method yielded the following regression equations: y = - 0.12 (95% CI: - 1.09 to 0.67) + 0.78 (95% CI: 0.65 to 0.95) x for WBC and y = 0.06 (95% CI: - 0.09 to 0.25) + 0.66 (95% CI: 0.57 to 0.73) x for RBC. The comparison of IQ200 Elite to manual method the following equations: y = 0.03 (95% CI: - 1.00 to 1.00) + 0.88 (95% CI: 0.66 to 1.00) x for WBC and y = - 0.22 (95% CI: - 0.80 to 0.20) + 0.40 (95% CI: 0.32 to 0.50) x for RBC. IQ200 Elite compared to Cobas u701 yielded the following equations: y = - 0.95 (95% CI: - 2.13 to 0.11) + 1.25 (95% CI: 1.08 to 1.44) x for WBC and y = - 1.20 (95% CI: - 1.80 to -0.30) + 0. 80 (95% CI: 0.55 to 1.00) x for RBC.ConclusionsThe two analyzers showed similar performances and good compatibility to manual microscopy. However, they are still inadequate in the determination of WBC, RBC, and EC in highly-pathological samples. Thus, confirmation by manual microscopic analysis may be useful.
Highlights
Urine screening is achieved by either automated or manual microscopic analysis
The comparison of IQ200 Elite to manual method the following equations: y = 0.03 + 0.88 x for WBC and y = - 0.22 + 0.40 x for RBC
IQ200 Elite compared to Cobas u701 yielded the following equations: y = - 0.95 + 1.25 x for WBC and y = - 1.20 + 0. 80 x for RBC
Summary
Urine screening is achieved by either automated or manual microscopic analysis. Chemical and microscopic testing of urine samples, known as urinalysis, is one of the most commonly-performed tests in clinical laboratories in order to illuminate several diseases. It has been suggested that the importance of the preanalytical stage for total quality be stressed by detailed illustrative advice for specimen collection and that attention is given to emerging automated technology, since automated urinalysis systems allow urine samples to be used as freshly as possible [7]. Despite several disadvantages of automated urinalysis systems, they have been introduced widely in clinical laboratories because it is very difficult to standardize urine analysis. The advantages and disadvantages of automated urine microscopic analyses have been well documented with the comparison of manual microscopic analysis [12]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
