Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Usefulness of UF-5000 automatic screening system in UTI diagnosis

  • Clinical Microbiology - Research Paper
  • Published:
Brazilian Journal of Microbiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We have evaluated the Sysmex UF-5000 cytometer use in microbiology for the screening of negative urines, looking for cut-off points to detect bacteria and leukocytes. The number of processed urines was 3569, the highest to date in these studies. The best general cut-off point has been 100 bact/μl, giving an area under the ROC curve of 0.868, a sensitivity of 96%, a specificity of 50%, 1.17% of false negatives, and saving 40% of cultures. The PPV and NPV have been 35.5 and 95.4 respectively. The leukocyte count has not been useful. Finally, we have evaluated urine screening usefulness, concluding that in laboratories such as ours (284 urines/working day) or smaller, it is not cost-effective.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Alenkaer LK, Pedersen L, Szecsi PB, Bjerrum PJ (2021) Evaluation of the Sysmex UF-5000 fluorescence flow cytometer as a screening platform for ruling out urinary tract infections in elderly patients presenting at the Emergency Department. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 81(5):379–384. https://doi.org/10.1080/00365513.2021.1929441

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Oyaert M, Delanghe J (2019) Progress in automated urinalysis. Ann Lab Med 39(1):15. https://doi.org/10.3343/ALM.2019.39.1.15

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Haugum K, Haugan MS, Skage J et al (2021) Use of Sysmex UF-5000 flow cytometry in rapid diagnosis of urinary tract infection and the importance of validating carryover rates against bacterial count cut-off. J Med Microbiol 70(12):001472. https://doi.org/10.1099/jmm.0.001472

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Zaman Z, Fogazzi GB, Garigali G, Croci MD, Bayer G, Kránicz T (2010) Urine sediment analysis: analytical and diagnostic performance of sediMAX® - a new automated microscopy image-based urine sediment analyzer. Clin Chim Acta 411(3-4):147–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cca.2009.10.018

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Gässler N, Paul H, Runge M (2006) Rapid detection of urinary tract infection - evaluation of flow cytometry. Clin Nephrol 66(5):331–335. https://doi.org/10.5414/cnp66331

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Zboromyrska Y, de Cueto López M, Alonso-Tarrés C, Sánchez-Hellín V (2019) 14b. Diagnóstico microbiológico de las infecciones del tracto urinario. Zboromyrska Y (coordinadora). Procedimientos en Microbiología Clínica. In: Cercenado Mansilla E, Cantón Moreno R (eds). Sociedad Española de Enfermedades Infecciosas y Micro-biología Clínica (SEIMC)

  7. Aspevall O, Hallander H, Gant V, Kouri T (2001) European guidelines for urinalysis: a collaborative document produced by European clinical microbiologists and clinical chemists under ECLM in collaboration with ESCMID. Clin Microbiol Infect 7(4):173–178. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1198-743X.2001.00237.x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Song D, Lee HJ, Jo SY, Lee SM, Chang CL (2018) Selection of unnecessary urine culture specimens using Sysmex UF-5000 urine flow cytometer. Ann Clin Microbiol 21(4):75–79. https://doi.org/10.5145/acm.2018.21.4.75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Grabe M, Bartoletti R, Johansen TEB et al (2015) Guidelines on urological infections. Eur Assoc Urol 182:237–257

    Google Scholar 

  10. Enko D, Stelzer I, Böckl M et al (2021) Comparison of the reliability of gram-negative and gram-positive flags of the Sysmex UF-5000 with manual gram stain and urine culture results. Clin Chem Lab Med 59(3):619–624. https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2020-1263

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Muñoz-Algarra M, Martínez-Ruiz R, Orden-Martínez B (2013) Evaluación del sistema automatizado UF-1000i® en el diagnóstico de infección urinaria. Enferm Infecc Microbiol Clin 31(1):29–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eimc.2012.05.017

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Broeren MAC, Bahçeci S, Vader HL, Arents NLA (2011) Screening for urinary tract infection with the Sysmex UF-1000i urine flow cytometer. J Clin Microbiol 49(3):1025–1029. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.01669-10

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. De Rosa R, Grosso S, Lorenzi G, Bruschetta G, Camporese A (2018) Evaluation of the new Sysmex UF-5000 fluorescence flow cytometry analyzer for ruling out bacterial urinary tract infection and for prediction of Gram negative bacteria in urine cultures. Clinica Chimica Acta 484:171–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cca.2018.05.047

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Marschal M, Wienke M, Hoering S, Autenrieth IB, Frick JS (2012) Evaluation of 3 different rapid automated systems for diagnosis of urinary tract infections. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 72(2):125–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2011.10.001

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Andreu A, Cacho J, Coira A, Lepe JA (2011) Diagnóstico microbiológico de las infecciones del tracto urinario. Enferm Infecc Microbiol Clin 29(1):52–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eimc.2010.06.008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Martín-Gutiérrez G, Martín-Pérez C, Toledo H, Sánchez-Cantalejo E, Lepe JA (2022) FlowUTI: an interactive web-application for optimizing the use of flow cytometry as a screening tool in urinary tract infections. PLoS One 17(11):e0277340. https://doi.org/10.1371/JOURNAL.PONE.0277340

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Manoni F, Fornasiero L, Ercolin M et al (2009) Cutoff values for bacteria and leukocytes for urine flow cytometer Sysmex UF-1000i in urinary tract infections. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 65(2):103–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2009.06.003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Wang J, Zhang Y, Xu DW, Shao W, Lu Y (2010) Evaluation of the Sysmex UF-1000i for the diagnosis of urinary tract infection. Am J Clin Pathol 133(4):577–582. https://doi.org/10.1309/AJCP1GT2JXOCQBCZ

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. De Rosa R, Grosso S, Bruschetta G et al (2010) Evaluation of the Sysmex UF1000i flow cytometer for ruling out bacterial urinary tract infection. Clin Chim Acta 411(1-16):1137–1142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cca.2010.03.027

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Kadkhoda K, Manickam K, DeGagne P et al (2011) UF-1000iTM flow cytometry is an effective screening method for urine specimens. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 69(2):130–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2010.09.013

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. De Frutos-Serna M, Asensio-Calle ML, Haro-Pérez AM, Blázquez-De Castro AM, Gutiérrez-Zufiaurre MN, Iglesias-García J (2014) Evaluation of the Sysmex UF-1000i flow cytometer for screening of urinary tract infection. Enferm Infecc Microbiol Clin 32(3):147–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eimc.2013.02.015

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Pieretti B, Brunati P, Pini B et al (2010) Diagnosis of bacteriuria and leukocyturia by automated flow cytometry compared with urine culture. J Clin Microbiol 48(11):3990–3996. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.00975-10

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Kim SY, Park Y, Kim H, Kim J, Koo SH, Kwon GC (2018) Rapid screening of urinary tract infection and discrimination of gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria by automated flow cytometric analysis using Sysmex UF-5000. J Clin Microbiol 56(8):10–128. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.02004-17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. March-Rosselló GA, Gutiérrez-Rodríguez MP, Simarro-Grande M, Orduña-Domingo A, Bratos-Pérez MÁ (2016) Evaluación del analizador de orinas Sysmex UF-1000i como método de cribado en el diagnóstico de la infección del tracto urinario. Rev del Lab Clin 9(1):3–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.labcli.2015.12.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Servicio de Microbiología Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío de Sevilla, Seville, Spain

    Héctor Toledo, Sara G. Punzón, Guillermo Martín-Gutiérrez, Juan A. Pérez & José A. Lepe

Authors
  1. Héctor Toledo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sara G. Punzón
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Guillermo Martín-Gutiérrez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Juan A. Pérez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. José A. Lepe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection, and analysis were performed by H. Toledo, S. G. Punzón, and J. A. Pérez. The first draft of the manuscript was written by H. Toledo and J. A. Pérez and supervised by J. A. Lepe. G. Martin-Gutierrez designed the FlowUTI software used for data analysis. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Héctor Toledo.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Toledo, H., Punzón, S.G., Martín-Gutiérrez, G. et al. Usefulness of UF-5000 automatic screening system in UTI diagnosis. Braz J Microbiol 54, 1803–1808 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42770-023-01052-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42770-023-01052-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation