medigraphic.com
SPANISH

Revista Mexicana de Patología Clínica y Medicina de Laboratorio

ISSN 0185-6014 (Print)
Órgano oficial de difusión de la Federación Mexicana de Patología Clínica, AC y de la Asociación Latinoamericana de Patología Clínica/Medicina de Laboratorio
  • Contents
  • View Archive
  • Information
    • General Information        
    • Directory
  • Publish
    • Instructions for authors        
  • medigraphic.com
    • Home
    • Journals index            
    • Register / Login
  • Mi perfil

2005, Number 1

<< Back Next >>

Rev Mex Patol Clin Med Lab 2005; 52 (1)

Urianalysis like screening before of urocultive

Aguilar Ag, Díaz By
Full text How to cite this article

Language: Spanish
References: 8
Page: 18-21
PDF size: 38.30 Kb.


Key words:

Urianalysis, urocultive, nitrituria, leukocyturia, bacteriuria.

ABSTRACT

With the intention of demonstrating that the urianalysis serves like an examination of screening of fast answer before deciding the request of a urocultive, 100 patients of the Hospital General de Zapopan with request for urianalysis and urocultive like method of diagnosis of infection of urinary routes were studied, making a comparative study between both through the determination of nitritos with reagent strip and quantification of leukocytes and bacterias in urinary sediment, as well as urocultive quantitative and qualitative by traditional methods. We had obtained a result of 18 positive urocultives (18%) and 82 negatives (82%). This study threw sensitivity to nitrituria of 72.2%, to leukocyturia of 55.5% and to bacteriuria of 100%. A specificity to nitrituria of 94.2%, to leukocyturia of 91.4% and to bacteriuria of 100%. A positive predictive value to nitrituria of 100%, to leukocyturia of 36.1% and to bacteriuria of 100%. A negative predictive value to nitrituria of 98.7%, to leukocyturia of 95.6% and to bacteriuria of 100%. With this study we had demonstrated the utility that represents soliciting a urianalysis before make the decision to ask for a urocultive, which, most of the occasions will be negative, meaning an economic loss and of time for the patient and a waste of time for the physician.


REFERENCES

  1. Henry JB. Diagnóstico y tratamiento clínico por el laboratorio. 9a ed. Barcelona, España: Masson-Salvat, 1993.

  2. Free AH, Free HM. Urianalysis in clinical laboratory practice. Cleveland: CRC Press, 1975.

  3. Ames. Modern urine chemistry. Elkhart: Ames Company, Division Miles Laboratories, 1976.

  4. Washington JA, White CMM, Laganiere M, Smith LH. Detection of significant bacteriuria by microscopic examination of the urine. Lab Med 1981; 12: 294.

  5. Giraldez MT, Peraza MJ, González GF, Rodríguez LM. Infección urinaria. Cinta reactiva y sedimento urinario vs urocultivo para determinación de bacteriuria. Caracas, Venezuela: Hospital Militar “Doctor Carlos Arrelo”, Departamento de Pediatría, 1999.

  6. Free AH, Free HM. Rapid convenience urine tests: Their use and misuse. Lab Med 1978; 9 (12): 9-17.

  7. Graff SL. Análisis de orina. Atlas color. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Panamericana, 1987.

  8. Bailey-Scott S, Finegold M, Martin WJ. Diagnóstico microbiológico. 6a ed. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Panamericana, 1983.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com

Mi perfil

C?MO CITAR (Vancouver)

Rev Mex Patol Clin Med Lab. 2005;52