A useful new classification of dysmorphic urinary erythrocytes

Urine Sediment Examination: Comparison Between Laboratory-Performed Versus Nephrologist-Performed Microscopy and Accuracy in Predicting Pathologic Diagnosis in Patients with Acute Kidney Injury

Key Points

A nephrologist is more likely to recognize the presence of pathologic casts and dysmorphic red blood cells. Nephrologist-performed urine sediment analysis is also highly accurate in diagnosing acute tubular injury or glomerulonephritis when compared with kidney biopsy.

Introduction

Automated urine technology is becoming the standard for urinalysis microscopy. We sought to compare urine sediment analysis performed by a nephrologist with the analysis performed by the laboratory. When available, we also compared the suggested diagnosis per nephrologists' sediment analysis with the biopsy diagnosis.

Methods

We identified patients with AKI who had urine microscopy with sediment analysis performed by the laboratory (Laboratory-UrSA) and by a nephrologist (Nephrologist-UrSA) within 72 hours of each other. We collected data to determine the following: number of red blood cells (RBCs) and white blood cells (WBCs) per high-power field, presence and types of casts per low-power field, and presence of dysmorphic RBCs. We evaluated agreement between the Laboratory-UrSA and the Nephrologist-UrSA using cross-tabulation and the Kappa statistic. When available, we categorized the nephrologist sediment findings into four categories: (1) bland, (2) suggestive of acute tubular injury (ATI), (3) suggestive of glomerulonephritis (GN), and (4) suggestive of acute interstitial nephritis (AIN). In a group of patients with kidney biopsy within 30 days of the Nephrologist-UrSA, we assessed agreement between the nephrologist diagnosis and the biopsy diagnosis.

Results

We included 387 patients with both Laboratory-UrSA and Nephrologist-UrSA. The agreement was moderate for the presence of RBCs (Kappa, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.55) and fair for WBCs (Kappa, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.27 to 0.45). There was no agreement for casts (Kappa, 0.026; 95% CI, −0.04 to 0.07). Eighteen dysmorphic RBCs were detected on Nephrologist-UrSA compared with zero on Laboratory-UrSA. Among the 33 patients with kidney biopsy, 100% ATI and 100% GN suggested per Nephrologist-UrSA were confirmed on the biopsy. Of the five patients with bland sediment on the Nephrologist-UrSA, 40% showed ATI pathologically while the other 60% demonstrated GN.

Conclusion

A nephrologist is more likely to recognize the presence of pathologic casts and dysmorphic RBCs. Correct identification of these casts carries important diagnostic and prognostic value when evaluating kidney disease.

Current state of the morphological assessment of urinary erythrocytes in The Netherlands: a nation-wide questionnaire

Background The morphological assessment of urinary erythrocytes (uRBC) is a convenient screening tool for the differentiation of nephrological (dysmorphic) and urological (isomorphic) causes of hematuria. Considering the morphological heterogeneity, this analysis is often perceived as difficult. There is no clear (inter)national consensus and there is a lack of external quality assessment programs. To gain insight into the heterogeneity within and between laboratories, we scrutinized the current state of this analysis in Dutch medical laboratories. Methods The laboratories, affiliated with the Dutch Foundation for Quality Assessment in Medical Laboratories, were invited to participate in a web-based survey, consisting of two questionnaires. The first one provided information about the institution and laboratory organization, and the second explored the variability in the morphological analysis of uRBC on the basis of categorization of 160 uRBC images. Statistical analysis was premised on binomial significance testing and principal component analysis. Results Nearly one third of the Dutch medical laboratories (65/191) with 167 staff members participated in the survey. Most of these laboratories (83%) were an integral part of secondary care. The statistical analysis of the evaluations of the participants in comparison to the consensus (three experts from two different medical laboratories) suggested a great degree of heterogeneity in the agreement. Nearly half of the participants consciously disagreed with the consensus, whereas one fifth demonstrated a random relationship with it. Conclusions In Dutch medical laboratories, results from morphological analysis of uRBC are heterogeneous, which point out the necessity for standardization and harmonization.

Enhancing the Detection of Dysmorphic Red Blood Cells and Renal Tubular Epithelial Cells with a Modified Urinalysis Protocol

Urinary sediment is used to evaluate patients with possible urinary tract diseases. Currently, numerous protocols are applied to detect dysmorphic red blood cells (RBCs) and renal tubular epithelial cells (RTECs) in urinary sediment. However, distinct protocols are used by nephrologists and medical technologists for specimen concentration and observation, which leads to major discrepancies in the differential counts of formed elements such as dysmorphic RBCs and RTECs and might interfere with an accurate clinical diagnosis. To resolve these problems, we first tested a modified urinalysis protocol with an increased relative centrifuge force and concentration factor in 20 biopsy-confirmed glomerulonephritis patients with haematuria. We successfully improved the recovery ratio of dysmorphic RBCs in clinical specimens from 34.7% to 42.0% (P < 0.001). Furthermore, we confirmed the correlation between counts by the modified urinary protocol and Sysmex UF-1000i urinary flow cytometer (r ≥ 0.898, P < 0.001). A total of 28 types of isomorphic and dysmorphic RBCs were detected using a bright field microscope, with results comparable to those using a standard phase contrast microscope. Finally, we applied Sternheimer stain to enhance the contrast of RTECs in the urinary sediments. We concluded that this modified urinalysis protocol significantly enhanced the quality of urinalysis.