A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

[Evaluation of the Sysmex UF-1000i flow cytometer for screening of urinary tract infection]. | LitMetric

AI Article Synopsis

  • The urine culture remains essential for diagnosing urinary tract infections (UTIs), but many tests yield negative results, suggesting a need for better screening methods to reduce workload and hasten negative result reporting.
  • The study tested the UF-1000i flow cytometer for screening urine samples, comparing results between two groups based on bacterial growth levels, showing high sensitivity and reasonable specificity in identifying negative cases for both groups.
  • Results indicate that while the UF-1000i could reduce the number of cultures needed—46% reduction for Group 1 and 57.5% for Group 2—the prevalence of false negatives raises concerns about its reliability, depending on patient characteristics and how positive cultures are classified.

Article Abstract

Introduction: The urine culture is a huge workload in the Microbiology Laboratory and remains the gold standard for the diagnosis of urinary tract infections. Considering the high prevalence of negative results, the implementation of a reliable screening method could lead to cost saving in the workload, and speed up reporting of negative results.

Methods: We evaluated the usefulness of the flow cytometer UF-1000i in the screening for negative samples than could be excluded from culture. We divided the samples into two groups, Group 1, males and women of childbearing age who were considered positive with a growth ≥ 104 CFU/ml, and Group 2, considered positive with ≥ 105 CFU/ml growth.

Results: On comparing the culture and screening data in the ROC curve, the best sensitivity and specificity points were 53.1 bact/μl for Group 1, and 128.3 bact/μl for Group 2. In Group 1, the sensitivity was 92.2% and a specificity of 60%, a reduction in urine cultures of 46%, with 2.1% false negative (42 samples). In Group 2, the sensitivity was 86%, with a specificity of 87.7%, a culture reduction of 57.5%, and 5.1% false negatives (74 samples).

Conclusion: The incorporating of the UF-1000i cytometer to the screening of urine samples depends on the characteristics of the patients and the definition of positive urine culture. In our case, with only studying bacteriuria, the data on the reduction of workload and the false negatives seriously question this incorporation.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eimc.2013.02.015DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

flow cytometer
8
cytometer screening
8
urinary tract
8
urine culture
8
negative samples
8
considered positive
8
bact/μl group
8
group sensitivity
8
false negatives
8
group
6

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!