...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Clinical Microbiology >Clinical evaluation of three urine screening tests.
【24h】

Clinical evaluation of three urine screening tests.

机译:三种尿液筛查试验的临床评价。

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Evaluations of screening tests for bacteriuria have traditionally compared the test results with those of quantitative urine cultures. However, many patients with symptomatic urinary tract infections can have less than 10(5) CFU/ml in their urine. Therefore, the results of urine culture and three screening tests (Bac-T-Screen, Chemstrip LN [which tests for leukocyte esterase and nitrate reductase], and Gram stain) were correlated with the clinical classification of urinary tract infection. The Bac-T-Screen test detected 98, 93, and 100% of the infections classified as probable, possible, and asymptomatic, respectively. In contrast, the Gram stain, leukocyte esterase, and nitrate reductase tests were all insensitive screening tests for infection. Additionally, only 45% of the patients with probable infections had greater than or equal to 10(5) CFU/ml. Thus, the majority of infected patients would not have been detected if quantitative urine cultures were used alone.
机译:传统上,对细菌尿的筛查测试的评估将测试结果与定量尿培养的结果进行了比较。但是,许多有症状性尿路感染的患者尿液中的CFU / ml低于10(5)CFU / ml。因此,尿培养的结果和三项筛查测试(Bac-T-Screen,Chemstrip LN(用于白细胞酯酶和硝酸还原酶的测试)和革兰氏染色)与尿路感染的临床分类相关。 Bac-T-Screen测试分别检测到98、93和100%的感染被分类为可能,可能和无症状。相比之下,革兰氏染色,白细胞酯酶和硝酸盐还原酶测试都是对感染的不敏感筛选测试。此外,只有45%的可能感染患者的CFU / ml大于或等于10(5)。因此,如果仅使用定量尿培养,就不会检测到大多数感染患者。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号