Send to

Choose Destination
Clin Chim Acta. 2007 Sep;384(1-2):28-34. Epub 2007 May 26.

Urine sediment examination: a comparison of automated urinalysis systems and manual microscopy.

Author information

Department of Laboratory Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taiwan.



Several automated instruments examining urine sediment have been introduced. We compared the performance of Sysmex UF-100 and Iris iQ200 with manual microscopy in urine sediment testing.


Four hundred and thirty-six urine samples were collected. The urine sediments were examined by manual microscopy and these 2 automated urinalysis systems.


The within-run CVs for urine samples ranged from 3.4% to 22.3% for the iQ200, 1.6% to 24.2% for the UF-100 and 12.5% to 43.9% for manual microscopy. Between-run CVs on quality-control samples ranged from 6.1% to 32.4% for the iQ200 and 3.5% to 24.7% for the UF-100. The agreement between methods was good for red blood cells and white blood cells counts based on r values of 0.935 to 0.968. However, for epithelial cells, the values measured by different systems were poorly correlated (r=0.888-0.922). The Bland-Altman plot indicated a trend towards the automated cell count being greater than the manual microscopy as the epithelial cell count increased. Casts were difficulty differentiated by 2 automated systems.


These 2 automated urinalysis systems demonstrated good concordance with each other in urine sediment examination. The automated process could be used as a screening procedure but some manual microscopy was still necessary.

[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center