2000
DOI: 10.1080/00365513.2000.12056993
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

European Urinalysis Guidelines

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
83
0
5

Year Published

2002
2002
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
7
3

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 225 publications
(88 citation statements)
references
References 189 publications
0
83
0
5
Order By: Relevance
“…Urinary microscopy was always performed on the second urine of the morning produced over a period of 2 h. All samples were processed within 3 h from collection according to the following standardised method previously published [20]: centrifugation of a 10 ml aliquot of urine for 10 min at 400 g (which corresponds to 2,000 rpm with the centrifuge of our laboratory); removal by suction of 9.5 ml of supernatant urine; gentle but thorough resuspension of the pellet in the remaining 0.5 ml of urine; transfer by means of a precision pipette of 50 μl of resuspended sediment to a glass slide covered with a glass coverslip with a size of 24×32 mm; examination of the samples in blind conditions by either GBF or GG, who used the same criteria for the evaluation of UEM (a 100% agreement was found in the classification of haematuria as glomerular or nonglomerular by using the criteria described below for ten samples, which were examined separately by the two observers in blind conditions); the use of a Leica Dialux 20 microscope equipped with phase contrast lenses, a device which is suggested for UEM evaluation [13] as well as for routine work [24]; counting of the erythrocytes per HPF at 400x; search of erythrocytic casts over 50 microscopic fields at low-power magnification [160x lowpower field (LPF)]; expression of the erythrocytes found as lowest-highest number/HPF (e.g. 3-5/HPF) and of casts as number/50 LPF.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Urinary microscopy was always performed on the second urine of the morning produced over a period of 2 h. All samples were processed within 3 h from collection according to the following standardised method previously published [20]: centrifugation of a 10 ml aliquot of urine for 10 min at 400 g (which corresponds to 2,000 rpm with the centrifuge of our laboratory); removal by suction of 9.5 ml of supernatant urine; gentle but thorough resuspension of the pellet in the remaining 0.5 ml of urine; transfer by means of a precision pipette of 50 μl of resuspended sediment to a glass slide covered with a glass coverslip with a size of 24×32 mm; examination of the samples in blind conditions by either GBF or GG, who used the same criteria for the evaluation of UEM (a 100% agreement was found in the classification of haematuria as glomerular or nonglomerular by using the criteria described below for ten samples, which were examined separately by the two observers in blind conditions); the use of a Leica Dialux 20 microscope equipped with phase contrast lenses, a device which is suggested for UEM evaluation [13] as well as for routine work [24]; counting of the erythrocytes per HPF at 400x; search of erythrocytic casts over 50 microscopic fields at low-power magnification [160x lowpower field (LPF)]; expression of the erythrocytes found as lowest-highest number/HPF (e.g. 3-5/HPF) and of casts as number/50 LPF.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Biological ( in vivo ) factors, changing the true concentration of a measured component, cause problems in the interpretation of laboratory results, although the measurement process itself is correct. They are called influence factors and patients should be adequately explained about possible interferences ( 59 ). …”
Section: Acrmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, this cut-off limit has been debated in recent years resulting in the use of reduced diagnostic thresholds ranging from 10 2 [4-7] and 10 3 [8-11]. …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%