Bolann B J, Sandberg S, Digranes A
Laboratory of Clinical Biochemistry, Gade Institute, University of Bergen, Haukeland Hospital, Norway.
Clin Chem. 1989 Aug;35(8):1663-8.
We examined 288 urine samples, using test strips, sediment microscopy, and culture. The ability of the leukocyte esterase and nitrite test strips to detect or exclude urinary tract infection, as defined by a positive culture, was evaluated by probability analysis. We found that the diagnostic efficiency of the esterase-nitrite combination was similar to that of sediment microscopy. Moreover, once the strip test results had been obtained, little additional information was given by microscopy. The importance of estimating the prevalence, or pre-test probability, of infection before the test result is evaluated is emphasized. We conclude that, for detecting or excluding urinary-tract infection, microscopy can be replaced by the esterase and nitrite test strips. If the probability of infection predicted by the test strips is not high (or low) enough compared with medical decision limits, the samples should be cultured.
我们使用试纸条、沉渣显微镜检查和培养对288份尿液样本进行了检测。通过概率分析评估了白细胞酯酶和亚硝酸盐试纸条检测或排除由培养阳性定义的尿路感染的能力。我们发现酯酶-亚硝酸盐联合检测的诊断效率与沉渣显微镜检查相似。此外,一旦获得试纸条检测结果,显微镜检查几乎不会提供额外信息。强调了在评估检测结果之前估计感染患病率或检测前概率的重要性。我们得出结论,对于检测或排除尿路感染,显微镜检查可以被酯酶和亚硝酸盐试纸条取代。如果与医学决策限度相比,试纸条预测的感染概率不够高(或低),则应进行样本培养。