Stankeviciute N, Sabah S, Singh A, Shaykh M, Bakir AA, Arruda JAL, Dunea G
Total urinary protein: dogma challenged
Am Soc Nephrol
J Am Soc Nephrol (abstract) (Sep) 7:1343 1996

Measuring the excretion of urinary protein can have significant prognostic implications in patients with kidney disease. It may also impact some therapeutic decisions such as dietary prescription, use of ACE inhibitors or antihypertensive agents. The causes of inaccurate or imprecise results are legion and frustrating.

This study by Stankeviciute et al. focuses on those problems that are due to the methodology employed to measure urinary albumin and protein. Random urine samples from 61 patients were evaluated for protein content using the Biorad dye binding assay in undialyzed and dialyzed urine. Another method involved chromatographic separation of the urinary albumin and protein, which were then each measured using appropriate standards. With the average protein value, measured as dye binding of dialyzed urine, representing 100%, chromatography yielded a value of 141% and dye binding of undialyzed urine yielded 121 percent. The question remains: which of these values best correlates with albuminuria? Albumin content was next measured using radioimmunoassay as a "gold standard". The values for total urinary protein from the above three methods were used to identify normal urine specimens and those with microalbuminuria. Then the radioimmunoassay values for albumin were used to identify false positives and false negatives.

Using these parameters undialyzed urine gave a false positive and false negative result 10% and 11% of the time, respectively. Dialyzed urine gave a false positive and false negative result 2% and 18% of the time, respectively.

Comment: These false positive and negative rates are not trivial. Unfortunately dialysis of urine specimens is labor intensive - chromatography and radioimmunoassay prohibitively so. In addition, in a clinical setting the increased accuracy of these latter techniques may well be diluted by other sources of error, e.g. collection or timing errors. Calculating the urinary protein to creatinine ratio may obviate some of these latter errors. Greg Cowell, M.D., University of Illinois at Chicago

To go back use the BACK button on your browser.
Otherwise click on the desired link to this article below:
Am Soc Nephrol
Assessing renal function : Urinary protein/albumin