ArticleActa biochimica Polonica2026
Screening performance of the MUS-3600 urine analyzer for urinary tract infection: comparison with urine culture.
Article in Acta biochimica Polonica, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Urine culture is the gold standard for diagnosing urinary tract infections (UTIs), but most samples yield negative results. A rapid and accurate screening method could accelerate reporting, reduce workload, and lower costs. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the MUS-3600 urine analyzer as a screening tool for UTIs. Methods: Urine samples submitted to the microbiology laboratory were analyzed using the MUS-3600 within 10 min of collection. The analyzer uses flow-type micro-imaging and artificial intelligence-based particle classification. Culture results with ≥10 Results: For white blood cells (WBC, >39/μL), sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and elimination rate were 63.4%, 84.5%, 50.8%, 90.1%, and 67.5%, respectively. Bacilli (>103/μL) showed 62.1%, 88.1%, 56.9%, 90.2%, and 70.4%. Suspected cocci (>859/μL) demonstrated lower accuracy (44.4%, 78.7%, 34.5%, 84.9%, and 62.8%). Combining WBC and bacilli yielded the highest elimination rate (77.2%) and NPV (87.9%). The analyzer performed better in males (NPV 93.9%) than in females (NPV 82.1%). Conclusion: The MUS-3600 provides moderate accuracy for UTI screening and may help reduce unnecessary urine cultures, particularly in male patients. However, its limited sensitivity, especially for cocci, prevents its use as a stand-alone screening tool. Further studies are needed to confirm its role as a complementary method for culture elimination.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.