A novel approach to screening and managing the urinary tract infections suspected sample in the general human population.

Background: Automated urine technology providing standard urinalysis data can be used to support clinicians in screening and managing a UTI-suspected sample. Fully automated urinalysis systems have expanded in laboratory practice. Commonly used were devices based on digital imaging with automatic particle recognition, which expresses urinary sediment results on an ordinal scale. There were introduced fluorescent flow cytometry analyzers reporting all parameters quantitatively. There is a need to harmonize the result and support comparing bacteria and WBC qualitative versus semiquantitative results. Methods: A total of 1,131 urine samples were analyzed on both automated urinalysis systems. The chemical components of urinalysis (leukocyte esterase and nitrate reductase) and the sediment results (leukocytes and bacteria) were investigated as potential UTI indicators. Additionally, 106 specimens were analyzed on UF-5000 and compared with culture plating to establish cut-offs that can be suitable for standard urinalysis requirements and help to guide on how to interpret urinalysis results in the context of cultivation reflex. Results: The medians of bacteria counts varies from 16.2 (absence), 43.0 (trace), 443.5 (few), 5,389.2 (moderate), 19,356.6 (many) to 32,545.2 (massive) for particular digital microscopic bacteriuria thresholds. For pyuria thresholds, the medians of WBC counts varies from 0.8 (absence), 2.0 (0-1), 7.7 (2-3), 21.3 (4-6), 38.9 (7-10), 61.3 (11-15) to 242.2 (>30). Comparing the culture and FFC data (bacterial and/or WBC counts) was performed. Satisfactory sensitivity (100%), specificity (83.7%), negative predictive value (100%), and positive predictive value (75%) were obtained using indicators with the following cut-off values: leukocytes ≥40/µl or bacteria ≥300/µl. Conclusions: Accurate urinalysis gives information about the count of bacteria and leukocytes as useful indicators in UTIs, in general practice it can be a future tool to cross-link clinical and microbiology laboratories. However, the cut-off adjustments require individual optimization.