1265例尿标本干化学分析法与尿沉渣显微镜检查法的比较

Comparison of 1265 urinary specimens examined by dry-chemistry method and urinary sediment examination

目的：探讨尿液干化学分析后进行尿沉渣镜检的必要性。方法：分别用尿干化学分析法和显微镜尿沉渣计数板法，同时对1265例尿标本进行检查和分析。结果：干化学法检查全部正常的506例标本中，有62例为镜检异常，假阴性率为12.25%(白细胞假阴性率为3.75%，红细胞假阴性率为5.73%，病理管型的假阴性率为2.77%)。干化学法检查为异常的759例标本中，尿沉渣显微镜计数有243例为正常，假阳性率为32.02%。结论：两种方法只能互为补充，而不能相互代替。尿干化学法分析后有必要对标本进行显微镜镜检。【

Objective: To investigate the necessity of urinary sediment examination in those that had been analyzed by dry-chemistry method. Methods: 1265 urinary specimens were analyzed respectively by dry-chemistry method and standard urinary sediment examination. Results: Of 506 urinary specimens which were negative examined by dry-chemistry method, 62 specimens were found positive by urinary sediment examination. The false negative rate was 12.25% (the false negative rate for WBC was 3.75%; for RBC, 5.73%; for pathologic casts, 2.77% ). Of 759 urinary specimens which were positive analyzed by dry-chemistry method, 243 specimens were found negative by urinary sediment examination. The false positive rate was 32.02%. Conclusion:It is necessary to examine urinary sediment even after the specimen was analyzed by dry-chemistry method. The two analysis methods of urinary specimen could be complementary to each other. However they could not replace each other.