Meagan Seeger (WDL): We have talked about whether we are maximizing preservation and the volume of tests we can do. We’ve brainstormed different systems we could use so more outreach clients have the ability to use urinalysis, because 24 hours in the refrigerator isn’t always the best, especially with clients all over the state. It feels like it is underutilized given the amount of problem specimens we get and the number of people who want to order it but are hesitant because they might not be able to get it to us in time.
Jason Anderson, have we made progress with the underutilization of preservatives in urine samples from your perspective and that of your customers?
Jason Anderson (Sysmex): There’s no single preservative capable of consistently maintaining clinically significant urine particles under all conditions. Urinary casts, for example, can carry substantial diagnostic value but are inherently fragile. We still have a long way to go in optimizing urine sample preservation to maintain particle integrity. Continued research is essential to developing improved preservatives that can provide greater confidence that we’re getting accurate results in all cases. Advances in AI‑driven analyzer algorithms would be welcome, particularly those that can more reliably recognize and flag suboptimal or degraded specimens.
Mariann Amador, what is your recent experience with not only preservatives but also collection tubes? Several readers after last year’s roundtable was published said the tube itself may be as important as the preservative.
Mariann Amador (Arkray): Sometimes you do not get much volume of urine in the lab, which is why the urine tube is important. It’s quite delicate to be able to preserve the urine so that you are able to analyze it as if it were just voided.
Matt Rhyner, is there an effort underway at Danaher to solve these problems of urinalysis through a process improvement and the business systems you specialize in?
Dr. Rhyner (Beckman Coulter): We’re focused on improving the field of urinalysis but not only through core analysis. You talked about sample storage and handling, automation connections, and things that optimize the overall workflow because the analysis is not the whole story. With our broad portfolio and expertise, we can start to optimize and connect to total lab automation as well as other pre- and postanalytical tools that will help. We want to innovate on the core analysis, but also middleware and other tools that can combine with other testing modalities to give a clinical diagnosis. We view urinalysis as an important node in the overall data flow.
There are different ways of imagining urinalysis within total lab automation. Would it be on one central line with chemistry and hematology or separate? What are your thoughts on that and what is your experience with your customers?
Dr. Rhyner (Beckman Coulter): In an ideal world you would offer both—a standalone high-volume urinalysis workcell and the ability to connect to an automation track, in which blood and urine are on the same TLA track. Some customers have figured it out on their own with bespoke connections.
Meagan Seeger, where should urinalysis be in total lab automation?
Meagan Seeger (WDL): In the grand scheme of things, it should all be attached, everything on one line, including chemistry and hematology. That would improve lab efficiency because we’re still doing manual pour-offs and walking them to the bench. Being able to place them directly on our line would help efficiencies between every department in the lab.
Right now you have a dedicated urinalysis automation that’s off the main line?
Meagan Seeger (WDL): Yes, but putting it on a main line would streamline workflows.