Glomerular Hematuria and the Utility of Urine Microscopy: A Review

Evaluation of hematuria and microscopic examination of urine sediment are commonly used tools by nephrologists in their assessment of glomerular diseases. Certain morphological aspects of urine red blood cells (RBCs) seen by microscopy may help in identifying the source of hematuria as glomerular or not. Recognized signs of glomerular injury are RBC casts or dysmorphic RBCs, in particular acanthocytes (ring-shaped RBCs with protruding blebs). Despite being a highly operator-dependent test, urine sediment examination revealing these signs of glomerular hematuria has demonstrated specificities and positive predictive values ranging between 90%-100% for diagnosing glomerular disease, although sensitivity can be quite variable. Hematuria is a commonly used tool for diagnosing patients with proliferative glomerulonephritis such as IgA nephropathy, antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis, and lupus nephritis, sometimes even as a surrogate for kidney involvement. Studies examining the role for hematuria in monitoring and predicting adverse outcomes in these diseases have shown inconsistent results, possibly due to inconsistent definitions that often fail to consider specific markers of glomerular hematuria such as dysmorphic RBCs, acanthocytes, or RBC casts. A consensus definition of what constitutes glomerular hematuria would help standardize use in future studies and likely improve the diagnostic and prognostic value of hematuria as a marker of glomerulonephritis.

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.

Automated urinalysis combining physicochemical analysis, on-board centrifugation, and digital imaging in one system: A multicenter performance evaluation of the cobas 6500 urine work area

BACKGROUND

We evaluated the analytical performance of the fully automated cobas® 6500 urine work area and its automated components-cobas u 601 and cobas u 701.

DESIGN AND METHODS

The study was conducted at three European centers using un-centrifuged surplus routine urine samples; all measurements were performed within 2 h of sample collection. Precision, sample carry-over, and method comparisons were evaluated per Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute guidelines. Method comparisons: cobas u 601 versus Urisys 2400 and cobas u 411 urine test strips; and cobas u 701 versus KOVA® visual microscopy and iQ200 analyzer. Operability and functionality were assessed using questionnaires.

RESULTS

Precision of the entire cobas 6500 system was within predefined acceptance limits and no significant carry-over was observed. Erythrocytes, leukocytes, nitrites, and protein were in good agreement (≥93%) with cobas u 411 reflectometry. High correlation was shown between the cobas u 701 analyzer and KOVA visual microscopy for red blood cells (RBC; slope, 0.89; Pearson's r, 0.95) and white blood cells (WBC; slope, 0.96; Pearson's r, 0.96), demonstrating equivalence of test results. The 97.5% percentile reference values on the cobas u 701 analyzer were 5.3 cells/μL (RBC) and 6.2 cells/μL (WBC). The cobas 6500 system showed good sensitivity for small bacteria (>1 μm) and pathological casts, and the user interface, maintenance wizards, and system design were highly rated by operators.

CONCLUSIONS

The fully automated workflow, high precision, and high throughput of the cobas 6500 system have the potential to facilitate standardization of urine screening.

Comparison of the diagnostic performance of two automated urine sediment analyzers with manual phase-contrast microscopy

Background

Recently, several manufacturers have launched automated urinalysis platforms. This study aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of the UF-5000 (Sysmex Corporation, Kobe, Japan) and the cobas® u 701 (Roche Diagnostics, Rotkreuz, Switzerland) urine sediment analyzers with manual phase-contrast microscopy as the reference method.

Methods

A total of 195 urine samples were analyzed on both automated platforms and subjected to manual microscopic examination. Agreement was assessed by Cohen’s kappa (κ) analysis. Sensitivities and specificities were calculated.

Results

The agreement of the UF-5000 with manual microscopy was almost perfect (κ > 0.8) for red (RBC) and white blood cells (WBC), renal tubular epithel cells, hyaline casts, bacteria (BACT) and yeast (YLC), substantial (κ = 0.61–0.80) for squamous epithel cells (SEC) and pathologic casts, and moderate (κ = 0.41–0.60) for transitional epithel cells. The cobas® u 701 showed substantial agreement (κ = 0.61–0.80) for WBC, moderate agreement (κ = 0.41–0.60) for hyaline casts, and fair agreement (κ = 0.21–0.40) for RBC, SEC, non-squamous epithel (NEC), pathologic casts, BACT and YLC. The UF-5000 sensitivities ranged between 98.5% for RBC and 83.3% for pathological casts. The cobas® u 701 showed sensitivities between 83.0% for WBC and 31.6% for YLC.

Conclusions

The UF-5000 (Sysmex) analyzer showed a better diagnostic agreement with manual phase-contrast microscopy compared to the cobas® u 701 (Roche) module. The Sysmex platform showed reliable results for urine sediment analysis. However, pathological samples should be verified with manual microscopy.