This study evaluated the performance of the stand-alone sediMAX conTRUST (77Elektronika, Budapest, Hungary) analyser as an alternative to microscopic analysis of urine. The validation included a precision, carry-over, categorical correlation and diagnostic performance study with manual phase-contrast microscopy as reference method. A total of 260 routine urine samples were assessed. The within-run precision was much better at higher concentrations than at very low concentrations. The precision met our predefined limits for all the elements at the different concentrations, with the exception of the lowest RBC, the WBC, pathological casts and crystals count. There was no sample carry-over. The analyser showed good categorical agreement with manual microscopy for RBC and WBC counts, moderate agreement for yeast cells, crystals and squamous epithelial cells and bad agreement for non-squamous epithelial cells, bacteria and casts. Diagnostic performance was satisfying only for RBC, WBC and yeast cells. The number of false negative results was acceptable (≤4%) for all elements after connecting the sediMAX conTRUST with an automatic strip reader (AutionMAX) and after implementation of review rules. We conclude that the sediMAX conTRUST should be used as a screening tool in combination with an automatic strip reader, for the identification of normal samples. Therefore, adequate review rules should be defined. Manual microscopy is still required in 'flagged' pathological samples. Despite the poor analytical performance on pathological samples, the images on the screen can be used for interpretation without the microscope and can be stored as PDF-documents for archiving the results.
Keywords: Automated urine analysis; Method validation, urine microscopy, automated urine sediment; SediMAX conTRUST.