BackgroundMicroscopic evaluation of urine is inconsistently performed in veterinary clinics. The IDEXX SediVue Dx® Urine Sediment Analyzer (SediVue) recently was introduced for automated analysis of canine and feline urine and may facilitate performance of urinalyses in practice.ObjectiveCompare the performance of the SediVue with manual microscopy for detecting clinically relevant numbers of cells and 2 crystal types.SamplesFive‐hundred thirty urine samples (82% canine, 18% feline).MethodsFor SediVue analysis (software versions [SW] 1.0.0.0 and 1.0.1.3), uncentrifuged urine was pipetted into a cartridge. Images were captured and processed using a convolutional neural network algorithm. For manual microscopy, urine was centrifuged to obtain sediment. To determine sensitivity and specificity of the SediVue compared with manual microscopy, thresholds were set at ≥5/high power field (hpf) for red blood cells (RBC) and white blood cells (WBC) and ≥1/hpf for squamous epithelial cells (sqEPI), non‐squamous epithelial cells (nsEPI), struvite crystals (STR), and calcium oxalate dihydrate crystals (CaOx Di).ResultsThe sensitivity of the SediVue (SW1.0.1.3) was 85%‐90% for the detection of RBC, WBC, and STR; 75% for CaOx Di; 71% for nsEPI; and 33% for sqEPI. Specificity was 99% for sqEPI and CaOx Di; 87%‐90% for RBC, WBC, and nsEPI; and 84% for STR. Compared to SW1.0.0.0, SW1.0.1.3 had increased sensitivity but decreased specificity. Performance was similar for canine versus feline and fresh versus stored urine samples.Conclusions and Clinical ImportanceThe SediVue exhibits good agreement with manual microscopy for the detection of most formed elements evaluated, but improvement is needed for epithelial cells.
Background:The IDEXX SediVue Dx (SediVue) is an automated, in-clinic urine sediment analyzer for veterinary patients. The bias between the results from manual microscopy and the SediVue is currently unknown.Objectives: To assess the diagnostic accuracy of the SediVue, we aimed to determine the bias between the SediVue (index test) and manual microscopy (reference standard) for the quantification of RBCs and WBCs in urine.Methods: Urine remnant samples were collected from cats and dogs that contained RBCs (n = 462) and WBCs (n = 510). Retrospective analysis of results from urine sediment examinations using both manual microscopy (using a KOVA and DeciSlide system) and the SediVue (1.0.1.3) was performed. Bias was determined with Bland-Altman plots. SediVue-captured images from high-bias samples were reviewed, and biases were compared.
Results:The median bias for semi-quantitative RBC and WBC counts was determined for RBC and WBC counts. The cutoffs were RBC ≤ 5/HPF, 0.3; RBC 5.1-10/HPF, 10.1;
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.