Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Comparison and Evaluation of FUS-2000
Urinalysis Hybrid and Conventional
Microscopic Examination
Prangthip Sukboon1, Supichcha Duangson1, Kridsada Sirisabhabhorn2,Chollanot Kaset1, Supaporn Pumpa2, Daungnate Pipatsatitpong1*
1Department of Medical Technology, Faculty of Allied Health Sciences, Thammasat University2Division of Clinical Microscopy and Parasitology, Department of Medical Technology Laboratory, Thammasat University Hospital
To evaluate performances of the FUS-2000 Urinalysis Hybrid compared with manual microscopic examination.
Three hundred and thirty four urine samples were collected from submitted inpatients for diagnostic urinalysis to the laboratory at Thammasat University hospital. All urine samples were examined by FUS-2000 and manual microscopy.Statistical analysis; leukocyte, erythrocyte, squamous epithelial cells and bacteria grading were analyzed by Wilcoxon signed ranks test and Spearman correlation.
334 Urine sample were
collected
Examined by FUS-2000
Urinalysis Hybrid
Centrifuged at 1500 rpm for 5
minutes
Manual microscopic examination
Data was analyzed by Wilcoxon signed
ranks test and Spearman correlation
ParametersSpearman correlation of coefficient (r)
FUS-2000 Urinalysis Hybrid
Manual
Leukocyte 0.887*
Erythrocyte 0.790*
Epithelial cells 0.709*
Bacteria 0.757*
The Spearman’s statistic showed the high correlation between FUS-2000 Urinalysis Hybrid and manual microscopy for leukocyte (r=0.887) , erythrocyte (r=0.790) , squamous epithelial cells (r=0.709) and bacteria (r=0.757).
Parametersp-value
FUS-2000 Urinalysis Hybrid
Manual
Leukocyte <0.001*
Erythrocyte <0.001*
Epithelial cells <0.001*
Bacteria 0.631
The Wilcoxon signed ranks test showed that the result from FUS-2000 and manual microscopy was statistic significantly different for leukocyte (p<0.001), erythrocyte (p<0.001), and squamous epithelial-cells (p<0.001). But for the bacteria, the result was not different (p=0.631).
Automated urinalysis becomes more essential in the laboratory for reducing human errors and turn-around time. The FUS-2000 Urinalysis Hybrid (Dirui Industrial Co. Ltd., China) is the new urine analyzer that has been introduced recently. This analyzer uses digital image based automatic particle recognition system.
INTRODUCTION
OBJECTIVE
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
The results showed that there were a high correlationbetween the FUS-2000 Urinalysis Hybrid and Manual microscopicexamination. Even though the grading number of leukocyte,erythrocyte and squamous epithelial cells were significantlydifferent (one level grading), the grading number of bacteria wasnot different. It can be concluded the FUS-2000 can be used inroutine laboratories but it still needs to be calibrated in order to getas accurate grading result.
The FUS-2000 showed good performances. It was time-saving and had standardized techniques for reducing pre-analyticalerrors such as specimen volume for analysis, centrifugation.
DISCUSSION & CONCLUSION
1. Yüksel H, Evliyaoǧlu O, Kiliç E, Ekinci A. Comparison of fully automated urine sediment analyzers H800-FUS100 and LabUMat-UriSed with manual microscopy. J Clin Lab Anal. 2013;
27(4): 312-6. 2. Mayo S, Acevedo D, Quiñones-Torrelo C, Canós I, Sancho M. Clinical laboratory automated urinalysis: comparison among automated microscopy, flow cytometry, two test strips analyzers, and manual microscopic examination of the urine sediments. J Clin Lab Anal. 2008; 22(4): 262-70.
REFERENCES
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We are grateful to thank Mr.Palakorn Puttarak,The Laboratory Director of Medical Technology Laboratory,
Thammasat University Hospital, who provided us with work space and equipments.
We also sincerely thank RND Diagnostics Co.Ltd (under MP Group) for supporting reagents and equipments.
The FUS-2000 uses uncentrifuged urine for digital imaging to capture and analyze 650 photos from each sample for an artificial intelligence identification technology in order to auto-classify the isolated images of the urine sediment constituents, and report them quantitatively.
*p< 0.05
*p <0.05
Table 1 : p-value of FUS-2000 vs Manual microscopic examination analyzed by Wilcoxson test
Table 2 : The Spearman’s correlation coefficient of FUS-2000 vs Manual microscopic examination
*Address correspondence: Duangnate Pipatsatitpong, Faculty of Allied Health Sciences,
Thammasat University, Thailand.
E-mail: [email protected] , [email protected]
