Manual urine microscopy versus automated urine analyzer microscopy in patients with acute kidney injury.
Lab Med
; 45(4): e152-5, 2014.
Article
en En
| MEDLINE
| ID: mdl-25425026
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE:
To examine whether a significant difference exists between the reported ranges of granular and muddy brown casts in urine specimens using manual microscopy compared with an automated urine analyzer in a cohort of patients with acute kidney injury (AKI).METHODS:
Freshly voided urine specimens from 25 consecutive patients who were under evaluation by the Department of Nephrology for AKI were simultaneously examined using the iQ200 automated microscopy system and manual microscopy performed by a trained observer. We coded the results according to the number of pathological casts identified and performed a 3 × 2 Freeman-Halton extension of the Fisher exact probability test.RESULTS:
Overall, the number of casts identified via manual microscopy differed significantly (P <.001) from the number identified via the automated microscopy system.CONCLUSIONS:
This study provides evidence of the importance of performing a manual microscopic examination of urine sediment in patients with AKI. Further studies are needed to assess whether manual microscopy provides prognostic implications regarding renal recovery, hemodialysis dependency, and mortality.Palabras clave
Texto completo:
1
Colección:
01-internacional
Base de datos:
MEDLINE
Contexto en salud:
6_ODS3_enfermedades_notrasmisibles
Problema de salud:
6_kidney_renal_pelvis_ureter_cancer
Asunto principal:
Automatización
/
Urinálisis
/
Lesión Renal Aguda
Límite:
Humans
Idioma:
En
Revista:
Lab Med
Año:
2014
Tipo del documento:
Article
País de afiliación:
Azerbaiyán