Comparison of laboratory methods in the diagnosis of urinary tract infection

泌尿道感染诊断中实验室方法的比较

阅读:1

Abstract

Three methods of semiquantitative culture and two techniques of microscopy were compared with a surface viable count for the detection of significant bacteriuria in one thousand midstream specimens of urine. The results obtained with the blotting-paper-strip method on MacConkey agar and with Uricult dip-slides correlated well with the results of the surface viable count, and both methods were suitable for routine use. The blotting-paper-strip method was preferred for laboratory use because of expense but dip-slides are useful for general practice and outpatient clinics. Semi-quantitative culture by Microstix dip-strips gave less accurate results, and the nitrite test area detected only a small proportion of infected specimens. The microscopic examination of a Gram-stained film of the centrifuged deposit of urine specimens yielded more useful information and was more reproducible than examination of a wet film of the untreated urine.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。