检验医学 ›› 2017, Vol. 32 ›› Issue (1): 22-25.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-8640.2017.01.006

• 临床应用研究_论著 • 上一篇    下一篇

爱威尿液分析流水线镜检规则制订及验证

刘万超1, 陈龙梅2, 杨振华2, 李冬1   

  1. 1. 同济大学附属同济医院检验科,上海 200065
    2. 上海市宝山区中西医结合医院检验科,上海 201900
  • 收稿日期:2016-03-31 出版日期:2017-01-20 发布日期:2017-02-10
  • 作者简介:null

    作者简介：刘万超,女,1981年生,学士,主管技师,主要从事临床检验工作。

    通信作者：李 冬,联系电话：021-56051080。

Establishment and verification of microscopy review rules in AVE automatic urine analysis

LIU Wanchao1, CHEN Longmei2, YANG Zhenhua2, LI Dong1   

  1. 1. Department of Clinical Laboratory,Tongji Hospital,Tongji University,Shanghai 200065,China
    2. Department of Clinical Laboratory,Shanghai Baoshan Traditional Chinese Medicine-Integrated Hospital,Shanghai 201900,China
  • Received:2016-03-31 Online:2017-01-20 Published:2017-02-10

RichHTML

0

PDF (PC)

636

被引次数

7

摘要：

目的 制订爱威尿液分析流水线的显微镜复检规则。方法 收集尿液常规样本2 278份,采用爱威752尿干化学分析仪（简称AVE-752）和爱威766尿有形成份分析仪（简称AVE-766）分别进行尿干化学和尿有形成分检测。所有样本均采用双盲法进行人工显微镜镜检,分别记录AVE-752检测结果、AVE-766检测结果及人工修正后结果、人工显微镜镜检结果。以人工显微镜镜检均值作为标准,判断AVE-752白细胞酯酶（LEU）、潜血（BLD）、蛋白（Pro）联合AVE-766人工修正前后白细胞（WBC）、红细胞（RBC）、管型（Cast）结果在4种方案（方案1：AVE-752和AVE-766识别的结果直接统计分析;方案2：AVE-752和AVE-766修正后的结果统计分析;方案3：在方案1基础上对阳性样本显微镜复检后统计分析;方案4：在方案2基础上对阳性样本显微镜复检后统计分析。）中假阴性率、假阳性率和错误率,并由此得出复检规则和复检率。随后选取344例尿液样本对复检规则有效性进行验证。结果 4种方案假阳性率分别为20.4%、13.5%、0.0%、0.0%;假阴性率分别为8.9%、4.2%、8.9%、4.2%;错误率分别为16.8%、10.6%、2.8%、1.3%;方案3和方案4复检率分别为42.4%、39.1%。人工审核修正了108例假阳性样本（WBC 76例、RBC 23例、Cast 9例）和33例假阴性样本（WBC 8例、RBC 25例）;修正后仍然存在假阴性样本30例（WBC 12例、RBC 18例）。344例验证样本假阳性率为0.0%、假阴性率为4.5%、错误率为1.5%、复检率为35.2%。结论 AVE-752联合AVE-766识别经人工修正后结果,除LEU/WBC、BLD/RBC、Pro/Cast均为阴性外,其他情况均需人工显微镜复检。

关键词: 尿液常规分析, 复检规则, 复检率

Abstract:

Objective To establish microscopy review rules of AVE automatic urine analysis. Methods Urine dry chemical and urinary sediment analysis was performed for 2 278 urine samples by AVE-752 urine dry chemical analyzer and AVE-766 urinary sediment analyzer. All samples were screened by microscopy with double blind method. AVE-752 and AVE-766 results,modified results and microscopy results were all recorded. Taking the average of microscopy results as standard,the review rules and review rates were established by false negative rates,false positive rates and error rates of 4 schemes（scheme 1：the results of AVE-752 and AVE-766 were analyzed directly;scheme 2：the modified results of AVE-752 and AVE-766 were analyzed;scheme 3：the positive results of scheme 1 were reviewed by microscopy and analyzed; scheme 4：the positive results of scheme 2 were reviewed by microscopy and analyzed）,which were based on leucocyte esterase （LEU）,occult blood （BLD） and protein （Pro）by AVE-752 and white blood cell（WBC）, red blood cell（RBC） and cast（Cast） by AVE-766 and/or modified. A total of 344 urine samples were determined to verify review rules. Results The false positive rates were 20.4%,13.5%,0.0% and 0.0%,the false negative rates were 8.9%,4.2%,8.9% and 4.2%,and the error rates were 16.8%,10.6%,2.8% and 1.3% . The review rates of scheme 3 and scheme 4 were 42.4% and 39.1%,108 samples with false positive results were modified （76 cases of WBC,23 cases of RBC and 9 cases of Cast）,and 33 samples with false negative results were modified（8 cases of WBC and 25 cases of RBC）. There still existed 30 samples with false negative results （12 cases of WBC and 18 cases of RBC）after modification. The false positive rate of 344 verified urine samples was 0.0%,the false negative rate was 4.5%,the error rate was 1.5%,and the review rate was 35.2%. Conclusions After the combined usage of AVE-752 and AVE-766,all samples should be screened by microscopy except LEU/WBC,BLD/RBC and Pro/Cast.

Key words: Urine routine analysis, Review rule, Review rate

中图分类号: 

沪ICP备17056660号-1
版权所有 © 《检验医学》编辑部
地址：上海市浦东新区洪山路528号　邮编：200126　
电话：021-68316211 68316300-1102　 传真：021-68315766　 Email：shjyyxzz@126.com
技术支持：北京玛格泰克科技发展有限公司