Abstract
The validity of routine microscopy of urinary sediments has been controversial, with many pathologists reporting that microscopy of the urine, the way it is performed, is practically useless except for the bacteriological work-up.1 Valenstein and Koepke2 have cautiously recommended that microscopy be reserved for urine specimens with abnormal physicochemical characteristics. By and large, it is true that urine microscopy adds little to the diagnosis when the results of the chemical examination, especially for protein and blood, are negative. Donauer3 compared results by dipstick and by microscopy in 13,479 urine specimens. He found that 12% of the specimens with negative chemistry findings were positive microscopically, whereas 54.6% of the specimens with a positive test for albumin were positive microscopically. Though arguments against routine urine microscopy may be valid in terms of cost-effective analysis, it would be difficult to measure the price of one misdiagnosis for the lack of it. Furthermore, the usefulness of urine microscopy is enhanced by the proper collection of samples and by using suitable techniques to examine them.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Gyory AZ: Urine microscopy (Letter to the Editor). Med J Aust 1979; 2:369.
Valenstein PN, Koepke JA: Unnecessary microscopy in routine urinalysis. Am J Clin Pathol 1984; 82:444–448.
Donauer RM: The value of microscopic examination of urinary sediment (Letter to the Editor). JAMA 1978; 240:2044.
Osborne J: Method of examining the urine, in A Sketch of the Physiology and Pathology of Urine. London, Burgess and Hill Medical Booksellers, 1820.
Brody L, Webster M, Kark RM: Identification of elements of urinary sediment with phasecontrast microscopy. JAMA 1968; 206:1777–1781.
Schumann, GB: Cytodiagnostic urinalysis for the nephrology practice. Sem Nephrol 1986; 6:308–345.
Winer RL, Wuerker RB, Erickson JO, Cooper WL: Ultrastructural examination of urinary sediment: Value in renal amyloidosis. Am J Clin Pathol 1979; 7171:36–39.
Stachura I: Electron microscopy of urinary sediment in Fabry’s disease (Letter to the Editor). JAMA 1977; 238:580.
Spurlock BO, Skinner MS, Kattine AA: A simple rapid method for staining epoxy-embedded specimens for light microscopy with the polychromatic stain paragon-1301. Am J Clin Pathol 1966; 46:252–258.
Mandal AK: Electron Microscopy of the Kidney ,ed. 1. New York, Plenum Publishing Corp, 1979, pp 59–90.
Leeson TS, Leeson CR: Histology ,ed. 2. Philadelphia, WB Saunders Co, 1970, pp 17–55.
Prescott LF: Th normal urinary excretion rates of renal tubular cells, leukocytes, and red blood cells. Clin Sci 1966; 31:425–435.
Mandal AK, Sklar AH, Hudson JB: Transmission electron microscopy of urinary sediment in human acute renal failure. Kidney Int 1985; 28:58–63.
Lindner LE, Vacca D, Haber MH: Identification and composition of types of granular urinary casts. Am J Clin Pathol 1983; 80:353–358.
Haber MH, Lindner LE: The surface ultrastructure of urinary casts. AM J Clin Pathol 1977; 68:547–552.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1987 Plenum Publishing Corporation
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Mandal, A.K. (1987). The Microscopy of Urine. In: Assessment of Urinary Sediment by Electron Microscopy. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-1851-4_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-1851-4_1
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4612-9033-9
Online ISBN: 978-1-4613-1851-4
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive