JPH04278460A - Method for controlling examination result of urine sediment, control marker particle and preparation thereof - Google Patents

Abstract

PURPOSE:To enhance the reproducibility of an examination result and to standardize said examination result, in the microscopic examination of a urine sediment, by eliminating the individual difference between urine specimens, the difference between measuring persons and the difference between installations. CONSTITUTION:The objective particles such as erythrocytes present in urine and marker particles discriminable under microscopic observation are added to urine to be centrifugally separated and the objective particles and marker particles in the obtained urine sediment are counted to correct the number of the objective particles on the basis of the recovery of the marker particles. The marker particles have a particle size of l-20mum and specific gravity of 1.040 or more and are different from the objective particles in a particle size or a hue under microscopic observation. Fixed erythrocytes are stained with 3,3'-diaminobenzidine and hydrogen peroxide to obtain brown marker particles.

Description

[Detailed description of the invention]

0001

[Field of Industrial Application] The present invention relates to a method for managing urine sediment test results, marker particles for management, and a method for producing the same.

0002

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION Urine contains red blood cells due to capillary hemorrhage, white blood cells due to extravasation, epithelial cells lining the kidneys and genitourinary organs, casts that form in the renal tubules under certain circumstances, and often local infections and systemic Contains tangible components such as microorganisms such as bacteria, fungi, protozoa, and parasites caused by infection. Additionally, in cases of renal failure, urine may contain crystals consisting of chemical components, pharmaceuticals, and free fats.

[0003] Therefore, by microscopic examination of urine, it is possible to know the concentration of these components and other components whose presence, absence, shape, and number are clinically significant, and it is possible to make clear judgments about the patient's medical condition. Microscopic examination of urine sediment is widely used worldwide because of its ability to provide

The conventional urinary sediment microscopy method is

As shown in FIG. 1, mix the urine sample 2 in the urine collection cup 1 well to make the components uniform, and then
Accurately sample up to the ml mark line 4 and use a centrifuge 5 to
500r. p. m. Centrifuge for 5 minutes and remove the supernatant by decanting or aspiration to obtain 200 μl (50 times concentration) of urine sediment 6. Next, the urine sediment 6 was uniformly suspended and about 15 μl was transferred to a slide glass 7, covered with a cover glass 8 and set on the stage of a microscope 9, and the morphology of the particles was observed at a magnification of 400 times, and the particles were classified and counted. Results are recorded manually on recording paper.

However, there are large individual differences in the amount of urine sediment in urine specimen 2, ranging from very thin urine sediment with only a small amount to those containing a large amount of mucus and having a urine sediment amount of 200μ.
1 (per 10 ml of urine). or,
Urine sample 2 with a large amount of urine sediment tends to be insufficiently mixed.

[0006] Also, in terms of operating methods, there are differences in the manufacturers of the Spitz tubes 3 used depending on the testing facility, and even in centrifugation, although the rotation speed and centrifugation time are standardized, the centrifugation load imposed by the centrifuge 5 used is The forces are different, and the recovery rate of each particle in urine also varies between testing facilities.

Furthermore, if the supernatant is removed by suction, it is possible to accurately reduce the amount of urine sediment to 200 μl, but this method is laborious and time-consuming, so it is not suitable for testing facilities that handle a large number of specimens. It is common to perform this by decantation, and as a result, the amount of urine sediment largely reflects individual differences, and may be less than 200 μl or greater than 200 μl, resulting in large fluctuations in the concentration ratio.

Furthermore, when transferring the urine sediment 6 to the slide glass 7,

As shown in FIG. 1, it is sufficient to suspend the urine sediment 6 with a dropper 10 and collect 15 μl, but this is time-consuming and costly, so the dropper 10 is not used in testing facilities that handle a large number of specimens.
In many cases, the spitz tube 3 is gently shaken to mix the urine sediment 6, and the spitz tube 3 is turned upside down and tapped onto a slide glass 7 to collect a drop of the urine sediment 6. However, with such a tapping method, the suspension of the urine sediment 6 may be insufficient, and the volume to be dropped may not be the standard amount 1.
The amount varies, sometimes being less than 5 μl and sometimes more than 5 μl.

[0009] As described above, although urine is easily obtained and there is a lot of diagnostic information that can be obtained from it, the components contained in it are easily denatured and it is difficult to predict what and how much it contains. Difficulties include the possibility of differences, differences between testing facilities, differences between testing personnel, etc. Therefore, the need for standardization of urine sediment is recognized.

[0010] Conventionally, there has been no standardization method for urinary sediment, and a method of using control urine for urinary sediment has been proposed for the purpose of quality control. That is, healthy human blood was washed with phosphate buffered saline (PBS) containing NaCl, and 2.
Red blood cells fixed with 5% glutaraldehyde and white blood cells collected from the blood and fixed with glutaraldehyde in the same manner were pooled together with normal urine and treated with 0.0% formalin.
In addition to the 5% concentration, a control urine obtained by adding sodium azide to the pooled urine obtained after leaving it at 4°C overnight, removing the precipitate, and adding sodium azide to a constant concentration was used to simultaneously collect red blood cells during routine tests. The purpose is to test the number of white blood cells and to manage the test results. (Hygiene Inspection, Volume 39, No. 1,
1990, 55-61)

[0011]

[Problems to be Solved by the Invention] However, although this control method using control urine is effective as a means of eliminating differences between testers and improving reproducibility within the same testing facility, it is difficult to avoid individual differences in urine samples. Variations in the amount of urine sediment cannot be corrected.

[0012] Furthermore, when the control urine was tested at 58 testing facilities across the country according to their own routine methods, the number of fixed red blood cells/μl (theoretical value 12.1 cells/HPF per field of view) was 33. Compared to the adjusted display value, 2.0 to 52.7 pieces per field of view, average 18.8 pieces, CV59.6
%, and the variation between facilities is extremely large, reaffirming the need for standardization (Medical Examination, Vol. 40,
1, 1991, 75-79).

[0013] Therefore, each testing facility must work on improving the test method so that the test result using the control urine is the indicated value of 33 cells/μl (12.1 cells/HPF), but as mentioned above, In order to improve the accuracy of test results for urine sediment, which has many variables, it is necessary to spend time and effort, which increases costs and limits the ability to process a large number of samples.

[0014]

[Means for Solving the Problems] The present invention was made to solve the above-mentioned conventional problems, and involves adding marker particles to urine and centrifuging the mixture to separate target particles and marker particles in the urine sediment obtained. The present invention relates to a urine sediment test result management method characterized by counting the target particles and correcting the number of target particles based on the recovery rate of marker particles.

[0015] Here, the correction method is as follows:
That's right.

(Number of target particles counted)×(Theoretical number of recovered marker particles ÷ Number of marker particles counted)...
・(Formula 1)

(Number of target particles counted) x (Number of experimentally recovered marker particles ÷ Number of marker particles counted)...
・(Formula 2)

(Number of target particles counted ÷ Number of marker particles counted) × (Urine concentration of added marker particles) (Formula 3)

Furthermore, it is also possible to add marker particles to urine and centrifuge it, count the target particles and marker particles in the urine sediment obtained, and rank the urine sample based on the ratio of target particles to marker particles. . The above correction methods may be used in combination.

[0020] The invention as marker particles used in the above urine sediment test result management method has particle diameters of 1 to 20 μm,
The marker particles have a specific gravity of 1.040 or more. Marker particles preferably have a particle diameter of 2 to 10 μm and a specific gravity of 1.05 to 1.20. Further, it is preferable that the particle size of the marker particles is different from that of the target particles in the urine sediment. Here, the term "target particles" refers to one or more particles found in urine sediment. For example, blood cell components such as red blood cells, white blood cells, histiocytes, flattened, transitional, renal tubules (small round), fat-containing cells, inclusion cells, multinucleated giant cells, epithelial cells such as atypical cells, hyaline, granular, and waxy cells. , red blood cells, white blood cells, blood, epithelium,
Other particles such as fat, casts such as casts, calcium oxalate, magnesium ammonium phosphate, calcium phosphate, calcium carbonate, ammonium urate, uric acid, crystals such as bilirubin, bacteria, yeast-like fungi, fat globules, amorphous salts, etc. be.

[0021] As marker particles, cells of animals, plants, etc., cells of microorganisms, latex particles, microcapsules, starch particles, gelatin particles, etc. can be used.

[0022] The marker particles have a particle size of 1 to 20μ.
If the particle diameter is preferably 2 to 10 μm, it is suitable for counting visually or by an automatic particle counter such as an automatic cell counter, and the specific gravity is 1.040 or more, preferably 1.06 to 1.0 μm.
When the particle size is 20, the recovery rate is the same as that of the target particles in urine when added to urine and recovered by centrifugation.

Further, if the color tone of the marker particles is selected to be different from the color tone of the target particles, identification and counting will be facilitated. As for the color tone of the marker particles, since target particles may be dyed by the Sternheimer method, Sternheimer-Marvin method, etc. depending on the testing facility, it is preferable to use a color tone that is different from the color tone of the target particles dyed by these methods. It is preferable to use colors observed other than red, purple, and blue, such as black, brown, green, and gold. Specifically, fixed stained blood cells,
Examples include stained cells, fixed stained cells, stained bacterial cells, fixed stained bacterial cells, colored latex particles, colored microcapsules, colored starch particles, and colored gelatin particles.

The above marker particles have a specific gravity of urine of 1.003.
Since the specific gravity is slightly higher than that of ~1.030, it may settle if left standing for a long time, so the specific gravity of the suspended liquid is preferably equal to or higher than the specific gravity of the marker particles. To adjust the specific gravity of the suspension, commonly used buffers may be used at high concentrations, and inorganic or organic salts, sugars such as saccharose, lactose, mannitol, sorbitol, etc. may be added. Furthermore, propylene glycol (specific gravity 1.036-1.040), dimethyl sulfoxide (specific gravity 1.100-1.105), diethylene glycol (
specific gravity 1.113-1.123), ethylene glycol (
specific gravity 1.114-1.117), glycerin (specific gravity 1.114-1.117), glycerin (specific gravity 1.114-1.117),
260 or higher) can also be used. That is, as long as it does not affect the properties of the target particles in the urine sediment or the urinalysis of the centrifuged supernatant, various substances can be used in combination to adjust the specific gravity. Furthermore, the dispersibility of marker particles can be improved by adding a nonionic surfactant.

The invention of the method for producing marker particles involves mixing fixed red blood cells with a reaction solution containing 3,3'-diaminobenzidine, hydrogen peroxide, and a surfactant in a buffer solution with a pH of 8 to 10, and then It is characterized by post-cleaning.

As the red blood cells, red blood cells of animals such as rabbits, cows, pigs, and sheep, as well as humans, can be used, and these red blood cells can be fixed with glutaraldehyde, formalin, or the like.

[0027] The buffer of pH 8 to 10 is pH 8 to 10.
Various buffering agents having a buffering power between 10 and 10 can be used, such as Tris-hydrochloric acid, glycine-NaOH, boric acid, and the like.

[0028] 3,3'-diaminobenzidine and hydrogen peroxide are added to the buffer solution, but in addition to these, a nonionic surfactant can be added.

If the concentration of the marker particles added is too low, the C.I. V. If the value becomes too large, and if it is too large, it will take time to count, so 5 to 5
A range of 00 is appropriate. Within this range, the time required for counting marker particles is short, there is no large variation in the overall operation time, and there is no problem in processing a large number of specimens.

[0030]

[Operation] When marker particles are added to urine at a concentration of 5 to 500 particles/μl, for example, 50 particles/μl, and centrifuged, 80 to 90% of the target particles and marker particles in the urine are sedimented and recovered. After removing the supernatant by decanting and homogenizing the urine sediment by shaking, collect one drop (approximately 15 μl) onto a slide glass using the knocking method, cover with a cover glass, and examine under a microscope to detect target particles and marker particles in each field of view. The target particles and marker particles are counted and averaged from multiple fields of view, respectively.

[0031] Assuming that the recovery rate of marker particles is 100%, the theoretical number of recovered marker particles is 18.4 per field of view (
Recommended method by the Japanese Society of Clinical Laboratory Technologists: 10ml of urine, 1500r.
p. m. , 5 minutes, suction removal of supernatant, urine sediment volume 200μl,
If the amount of urine sediment collected is 15 μl) and the average number of marker particles is 18.4, the recovery rate is 100%. for example,
If the amount of urine sediment exceeds 200 μl, the concentration rate is 5.
The average number of marker particles is 18.4/h.
PF or less, and the recovery rate is 100% or less, but since the recovery rate of the target particles is also the same, if it is corrected using Equation 1, it will be corrected based on the theoretical number of recovered particles. In addition, when the amount of urine sediment is less than 200 μl, the concentration rate is more than 50 times by decantation, the average number of marker particles is more than 18.4/HPF, and the recovery rate is more than 100%. Since the recovery rate of is also the same, if it is corrected using Equation 1, it will be similarly corrected based on the theoretical number of recovered particles.

[0032] As a result, individual differences in urine samples and testing methods,
Differences between inspection facilities such as inspection equipment and inspection personnel are corrected, and reproducibility is improved, and the average number of target particles per field of view is corrected and standardized based on the theoretical number of recovered particles.

[0033] Furthermore, by determining the average number of recovered marker particles in advance through experiments at each testing facility, the conventional average number of recovered marker particles at each testing facility can be used as the standard for correction. This will correct individual differences in urine samples and improve measurement accuracy such as reproducibility, without changing the criteria for determining test results at each testing facility.

Furthermore, for example, marker particles may be added to the urine sample at 5
When added to the concentration of 0 particles/μl, by multiplying the ratio of target particles to marker particles in multiple fields of view by 50, the number of target particles in the urine sample can be expressed as a concentration, and the concentration of the target particles in the urine sample can be displayed. Since individual differences and differences between testing facilities are corrected, it can also be used with the direct method.

Furthermore, when marker particles are added to urine and centrifuged, target particles and marker particles in the obtained urine sediment are counted, and the urine sample is ranked according to the ratio of target particles to marker particles, the urine sediment inspection can be made more rational and faster. In other words, in recent years, rather than expressing the number of each target particle in urine sediment as a continuous numerical value, appropriate intervals have been set for the number depending on the target particle, and the number of target particles in the urine sample has been ranked. There is a tendency to make it easier to judge test results and to streamline tests, and in particular systems that report test results online using a computer often rank them.

[0036] The marker particles to be added have a particle size of 1 to 1.
If the particle size is in the range of 20 μm, it is easy to recognize and count during microscopy, and if the particle size is different from the target particle, identification becomes even easier and counting by an automatic particle counter becomes possible. If the specific gravity of marker particles is 1.04 or more, it can be recovered by centrifugation, and if it is in the range of 1.06 to 1.20, it can be recovered because it behaves the same as the target particles in the urine sample during centrifugation. rates will be approximately the same. Further, if the marker particles have a different color tone under a microscope from the target particles, it becomes easier to distinguish them from the marker particles. Furthermore, by suspending the marker particles in a liquid with a specific gravity equal to or higher than that of the marker particles, sedimentation due to long-term storage of the marker particles is prevented, and suspension homogenization before addition is facilitated, allowing for immediate use and dispersion in urine samples. The properties are also improved.

[0037]

[Example] Example 1 Marker particles made by coloring green latex particles with an average particle diameter of 5 μm and a specific gravity of 1.100 were adjusted to 10,000 particles/μl, and 50 μl was added to 10 ml of urine.
The number of marker particles per μl is 50. 1500r.
p. m. After centrifuging for 5 minutes at
The specimen was covered with a 3.0 mm cover glass and examined under a microscope at a magnification of 400 times, and the target particles (erythrocytes) and marker particles (latex particles) were counted, and the average values of multiple fields of view were calculated.

[0038] The average number of red blood cells in 10 visual fields is 15.2/1
field of view (HPF), and the average number of marker particles is 14.5.
number/HPF. The number of red blood cells in the sample urine corrected by Equation 1 was 19.3 particles/HPF, assuming that the theoretical number of recovered marker particles according to the method of the Japanese Society of Clinical Laboratory Technicians was 18.4 particles/HPF.

Example 2 The same procedure as in Example 1 was carried out using microcapsules with an average particle diameter of 2 μl and a specific gravity of 1.080. The average number of white blood cells was 14.3 per field of view, and the average number of marker particles was There were 12.3 pieces.

[0040] The average number of recovered marker particles per field of view obtained by performing the same procedure using 10 urine samples was 11.
．． Since the number of white blood cells was 6, the number of white blood cells in the urine sample corrected by Equation 2 was 13.5 cells/HPF.

Example 3 The same procedure as in Example 1 was carried out using marker particles made of latex particles colored black with an average particle diameter of 8 μm and a specific gravity of 1.110, and the number of marker particles per 1 μl of urine was 40. The average number of red blood cells was 27.8/HPF, and the average number of marker particles was 19.3/HPF. Formula 3
The number of red blood cells in the urine sample corrected by 57.
There were 6 pieces.

Example 4 The average ratio of the number of red blood cells to the marker particles was calculated in the same manner as in Example 1, and the result was 15.2:14.5, and the number of red blood cells was 1.05 times the number of marker particles. Met. In advance, the theoretical number of collected marker particles per field of view was determined to be 18.
When ranked as 4 red blood cells, when the number of red blood cells per field is 1 to 5, the ratio of red blood cells to marker particles is 0.054 to 0.272, and similarly when the number of red blood cells is 6 to 10, case is 0.326 to 0.543, and 11
~ In the case of 20 pieces, it is 0.611 ~ 1.087, and 21
In the case of ~50 pieces, it is 1.141 ~ 2.717, and 51 ~
In the case of 100 pieces, it is 2.771 to 5.435, and 101
If the number is 5.489 or more, the value is 5.489 or more. Therefore, since the urine sample has a red blood cell count ratio of 1.05, the red blood cell count is 11.
It was ranked in the range of ~20 pieces/HPF.

Example 5 Human red blood cells are fixed with glutaraldehyde and suspended in a pH 9 Tris-HCl buffer. 250 mg of 3,3'-diaminobenzidine in 50 ml of pH 9 Tris-HCl buffer
, 1.5 ml of 3% hydrogen peroxide solution, and 1.0 ml of Tween 80 were added to prepare a reaction solution. The reaction solution and the fixed red blood cells were mixed in equal amounts, washed with PBS after 10 minutes, adjusted to 10,000 cells/μl in PBS containing a preservative, suspended, and stored refrigerated.

Example 6 10 ml of urine was collected into a plastic Spitz tube with marked lines, and 50 μl of the fixed and stained blood cells prepared in Example 5 was added to give a concentration of 50 cells per 1 μl of urine. 1500r. p.
m. Centrifuge for 5 minutes, remove the supernatant with an aspirator, make the sediment volume 200 μl, mix uniformly with a micropipette, collect 15 μl onto a slide glass, cover with a cover glass, and count red blood cells and fixed stained blood cells. 10
The visual field was averaged. When the above operation was repeated 10 times at the same time, the average number of red blood cells was 12.3/HPF and C.
V. was 8.5%. In addition, the average number of fixed and stained blood cells was 1
1.2 pieces/HPF and C. V. was 8.3%. If the theoretical recovery value of fixed stained blood cells is 18.4 cells/HPF and corrected by formula 1, the number of red blood cells in the urine sample is 20.2.
pcs/HPF.

Example 7 Using 30 urine specimens, the average number of red blood cells and the average number of fixed stained blood cells per field of view were determined for each urine specimen in the same manner as in Example 6. The average value of 30 cases of fixed and stained blood cells was 13.
3 pieces/HPF, C. V. was 22.2%. The number of red blood cells in each urine sample was corrected using Equation 2 using the experimentally obtained average value of 13.3 cells/HPF.

Example 8 In Example 6, the Spitz tube was made of glass, the supernatant was removed using a decant, and the urine sediment was collected by the tapping method. The average number of red blood cells per field of view for 10 times is 38.
．． With 8 pieces, C. V. was 24.3%, and the average number of fixed and stained blood cells was 39.5. V. was 22.1%. When the theoretical recovery value was set as 18.4 cells/HPF and corrected using Formula 1, the average number of red blood cells was 18.1 cells/HPF.

Example 9 Using the 30 urine samples used in Example 7, the average number of red blood cells and the average number of fixed stained blood cells per field of view of each urine sample were determined by the same procedure as in Example 8. Fixed stained blood cells 3
The average value of 0 cases was 38.5 pieces/HPF, and C. V. is 44
．． It was 8%. Experimentally obtained average value: 38.5 pieces/
When the red blood cell count of each urine sample was corrected using HPF according to Equation 2, corrected values similar to the red blood cell counts of the 30 urine samples obtained in Example 7 were obtained.

Example 10 In Example 8, 15 μl of urine sediment was collected using a dropper.
This was done by sampling. The 10-time average value of the average red blood cell count was 35.2 cells/HPF, which was C. V. C. was 11.5%, and the average value of fixed and stained blood cells was 34.0 cells/HPF. V. is 1
It was 0.6%. When the theoretical recovery value was set as 18.4 cells/HPF and corrected using equation 1, the average red blood cell count was 19.
It became 0 pieces/HPF.

Example 11 Using the 30 urine samples used in Example 7, Example 10
The average number of red blood cells and the average number of fixed stained blood cells per field of view for each urine specimen were determined by the same procedure as above. The average value of fixed stained blood cells in 30 cases was 26.2 cells/HPF, and C. V. is 3
It was 9.4%. Using the experimentally obtained average value of 26.2 cells/HPF, the number of red blood cells in each urine sample was corrected using formula 2, and the number of red blood cells in the 30 urine samples obtained in Examples 7 and 9 was Approximate correction values were obtained respectively.

Example 12 The amount of urine collected in the urine collection cup was read using the scale of the urine collection cup, and starch particles colored by the iodostarch reaction (18,500 particles/μl) were measured per 10ml of urine.
) was added (18.5 particles/μl urine), and when the urine collection cup was shaken, it was confirmed that the blue starch particles were evenly suspended and the contents were mixed uniformly. 10 ml of this urine was collected into a Spitz tube and operated in the same manner as in Example 1.

[0051] 5 colored starch particles/HP in 10 visual fields
Since it was around F, it was confirmed that the urine was homogenized. The average number of red blood cells was 20.4/HPF, and the average number of latex particles was 13.7. The theoretical number of recovered latex is 18.
．． Assuming 4 cells/HPF, the number of red blood cells was corrected using equation 1 to be 27.4 cells/HPF.

According to this example, by adding two types of marker particles with different sizes and/or colors to the urine collection cup and Spitz tube, it is possible to easily and reliably confirm the uniformity of the components during urine collection, and also to achieve the purpose. Particle correction can also be performed, which not only improves individual differences in urine samples, but also improves reproducibility and significantly improves the quality of test results.

Example 13 Latex particles with an average particle diameter of 3 μm and a specific gravity of 1.050 were adjusted to 10,000 particles/μl, and 50 μl was added per 10 ml of urine.
was added and mixed well. This was directly counted using an automatic particle counter, distinguishing between red blood cells with a particle size of 7 μm and marker particles with a particle size of 3 μm. The displayed concentration of marker particles is 50 particles/μl, but the measured value is 49 particles/μl.
Therefore, it was confirmed that the urine was sufficiently mixed.

[0054]

[Effects of the Invention] As described above, according to the present invention, the following various excellent effects can be obtained.

1. According to the method of the present invention, it is possible to correct not only inter-measurer differences and inter-facility differences in urine sediment test results, but also individual differences in urine samples, and is useful for quality control.

2. If the target particle number is corrected using Equation 1 based on the theoretical recovery value of marker particles per field of view, test results that comply with the Japanese Society of Clinical Laboratory Technicians method can be obtained, and it can be used not only within a testing facility but also between testing facilities. Standardization becomes possible on a national scale.

3. By correcting the number of target particles using Equation 2 based on the experimentally recovered average value of marker particles per field of view, individual differences in urine samples can be corrected without changing the conventional judgment criteria at each testing facility. Can be done.

4. By calculating the average number of target particles and the average marker particles per field of view and correcting them using equation 3, the concentration of target particles in urine (particles/μl urine) can be obtained, and the number of target particles in urine can be obtained. The concentration can be displayed directly. Furthermore, when used together with the correction based on Equation 2, the concentration display allows standardization among testing facilities without changing the conventional judgment criteria of each testing facility.

5. Urine specimens can be ranked for each target particle based on the ratio of the average number of target particles per field of view to the average number of marker particles, making counting and reporting easy and rational.

6. Since the marker particles have a diameter of 1 to 20 μm and a specific gravity of 1.04 or more, the recovery rate from the urine specimen is approximately the same as that of the target particles, and they can be easily counted during microscopy.

7. If the diameter of the marker particles is different from that of the target particles, identification becomes easier, and if the color tones of the marker particles and the target particles are different, identification and counting become even easier.

8. By fixing and staining red blood cells, marker particles that are easy to identify and are stable can be obtained.

[Brief explanation of the drawing]

FIG. 1 is an explanatory diagram showing a urine sediment testing method.

[Explanation of symbols]

1 Urine collection cup 2 Urine sample 3 Spitz tube 4 Marked line 5 Centrifugal separator 6 Urine sediment 9 Microscope 10 Dropper

Claims (19)

[Claims] 1. Urine characterized in that marker particles are added to urine and centrifuged, target particles and marker particles in the obtained urine sediment are counted, and the number of target particles is corrected based on the recovery rate of marker particles. Sediment test results management method. Claim 2: (Number of target particles counted) x (Theoretical number of recovered marker particles ÷ Number of marker particles counted)
The method for managing urinary sediment test results according to claim 1, wherein the correction is performed according to formula 1. Claim 3: (Number of target particles counted) x (Number of experimentally recovered marker particles ÷ Number of marker particles counted)
The method for managing urinary sediment test results according to claim 1, wherein the correction is performed according to formula 2. 4. The urinary sediment test according to claim 1, which is corrected by (the number of counted target particles ÷ the number of counted marker particles) x (urinary concentration of added marker particles) (Equation 3). How to manage grades. [Claim 5] The method is characterized in that marker particles are added to urine and centrifuged, target particles and marker particles in the obtained urine sediment are counted, and the urine sample is ranked according to the ratio of target particles to marker particles. Method for managing urine sediment test results. 6. The marker particles have a particle size of 1 to 20 μm,
Claim 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5, wherein the specific gravity is 1.040 or more.
The urine sediment test results management method described. 7. The method for managing urine sediment test results according to claim 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5, wherein the marker particles have a different particle size from the target particles. 8. The marker particles have different particle diameters from the target particles, and counting is performed using an automatic particle counter.
The method for managing urine sediment test results according to 3, 4 or 5. 9. The method for managing urine sediment test results according to claim 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5, wherein the marker particles are cells, bacterial cells, latex particles, microcapsules, starch particles, gelatin particles, or pollen. 10. The method for managing urine sediment test results according to claim 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5, wherein the marker particles have a different color tone under a microscope than the target particles. 11. Claims 1 and 2 wherein the marker particles are fixed stained blood cells, stained cells, fixed stained cells, stained bacterial cells, fixed stained bacterial cells, colored latex particles, colored microcapsules, colored starch particles, and colored gelatin particles. , 3, 4 or 5, the urine sediment test results management method. Claim 12: Particle size: 1 to 20 μm, specific gravity: 1.04
A marker particle for managing urine sediment test results whose value is 0 or more. 13. The marker particle according to claim 12, wherein the marker particle has a particle size different from that of the target particle in urine sediment. 14. The marker particle according to claim 12, wherein the marker particle is a cell, a bacterial cell, a latex particle, a microcapsule, a starch particle, or a gelatin particle. 15. The marker particle according to claim 12, wherein the marker particle has a different color tone under a microscope than the target particle. 16. The marker particles according to claim 15, wherein the marker particles are fixed stained blood cells, stained cells, fixed stained cells, stained bacterial cells, fixed stained bacterial cells, colored latex particles, colored microcapsules, colored starch particles, and colored gelatin particles. marker particles. 17. The marker particles according to claim 12, which are suspended in a liquid having a specific gravity equal to or higher than that of the marker particles. 18. A method characterized in that fixed red blood cells are mixed with a reaction solution containing 3,3'-diaminobenzidine, hydrogen peroxide, and a surfactant in a buffer solution with a pH of 8 to 10, and washed after a certain period of time. A method for producing marker particles for managing urine sediment test results. 19. Glutaraldehyde-fixed red blood cells are mixed with a reaction solution containing 3,3'-diaminobenzidine, hydrogen peroxide, and a nonionic surfactant in a pH 9 Tris-HCl buffer, and the mixture is incubated for a certain period of time. 19. The method according to claim 18, further comprising post-washing.