Suppr超能文献

急诊科成人尿流式细胞术和尿试纸分析在诊断菌尿症和尿路感染中的应用——一项诊断准确性试验

Urine Flow Cytometry and Dipstick Analysis in Diagnosing Bacteriuria and Urinary Tract Infections among Adults in the Emergency Department-A Diagnostic Accuracy Trial.

作者信息

Hertz Mathias Amdi, Johansen Isik Somuncu, Rosenvinge Flemming S, Brasen Claus Lohman, Andersen Eline Sandvig, Østergaard Claus, Skovsted Thor Aage, Petersen Eva Rabing Brix, Nielsen Stig Lønberg, Mogensen Christian Backer, Skjøt-Arkil Helene

机构信息

Department of Infectious Diseases, Odense University Hospital, 5000 Odense, Denmark.

Research Unit of Infectious Diseases, Department of Clinical Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, 5000 Odense, Denmark.

出版信息

Diagnostics (Basel). 2024 Feb 13;14(4):412. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics14040412.

Abstract

Urinary tract infections (UTIs) are a leading infectious cause of emergency department admission. Early UTI diagnosis is challenging, and a faster, preferably point-of-care urine analysis is necessary. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of urine flow cytometry (UFC) and urine dipstick analysis (UDA) in identifying bacteriuria and UTIs. This study included adults suspected of an infection admitted to three Danish emergency departments. UFC and UDA were the index tests, and urine culture and an expert panel diagnosis were the reference tests. We used logistic regression and receiver operator characteristics curves to find each test's optimal model and cut-off. We enrolled 966 patients and performed urine cultures on 786. Urine culture was positive in 337, and 200 patients were diagnosed with a UTI. The UFC model ruled out bacteriuria in 10.9% with a negative predictive value (NPV) of 94.6% and ruled out UTI in 38.6% with an NPV of 97.0%. UDA ruled out bacteriuria in 52.1% with an NPV of 79.2% and UTI in 52.8% with an NPV of 93.9%. Neither UFC nor UDA performed well in ruling out bacteriuria in our population. In contrast, both tests ruled out UTI safely and in clinically relevant numbers.

摘要

尿路感染(UTIs)是急诊入院的主要感染原因。早期尿路感染诊断具有挑战性,因此需要一种更快的、最好是即时检验的尿液分析方法。我们旨在评估尿流式细胞术(UFC)和尿试纸分析(UDA)在识别菌尿症和尿路感染方面的诊断准确性。本研究纳入了丹麦三家急诊科收治的疑似感染的成年人。UFC和UDA为指标检测,尿培养和专家小组诊断为参考检测。我们使用逻辑回归和受试者工作特征曲线来确定每项检测的最佳模型和临界值。我们招募了966名患者,其中786人进行了尿培养。337人的尿培养呈阳性,200名患者被诊断为尿路感染。UFC模型排除菌尿症的比例为10.9%,阴性预测值(NPV)为94.6%,排除尿路感染的比例为38.6%,NPV为97.0%。UDA排除菌尿症的比例为52.1%,NPV为79.2%,排除尿路感染的比例为52.8%,NPV为93.9%。在我们的研究人群中,UFC和UDA在排除菌尿症方面表现均不佳。相比之下,两项检测都能安全地排除尿路感染,且排除比例具有临床相关性。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5e17/10888022/a143de6a2fc2/diagnostics-14-00412-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验