• 1.

    Lees GE, Brown SA & Elliot J, et al. Assessment and management of proteinuria in dogs and cats: 2004 ACVIM Forum consensus statement (small animal). J Vet Intern Med 2005;19:377385.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2.

    DiBartola SP, Chew DJ, Jacobs G. Quantitative urinalysis including 24-hour protein excretion in the dog. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1980;16:537546.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3.

    Center SA, Wilkinson E & Smith CA, et al. 24-Hour urine protein/creatinine ratio in dogs with protein-losing nephropathies. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1985;187:820824.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4.

    Moore FM, Brum SL, Brown L. Urine protein determination in dogs and cats: comparison of dipstick and sulfosalicylic acid procedures. Vet Clin Pathol 1991;20:9597.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5.

    Zatelli A, Paltrinieri S & Nizi F, et al. Evaluation of a urine dipstick test for confirmation or exclusion of proteinuria in dogs. Am J Vet Res 2010;71:235240.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6.

    Jacob F, Polzin DJ & Osborne CA, et al. Evaluation of the association between initial proteinuria and morbidity rate or death in dogs with naturally occurring chronic renal failure. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2005;226:393400.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7.

    Lees GE. Early diagnosis of renal disease and renal failure. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 2004;34:867885.

  • 8.

    Grauer GF. Measurement, interpretation, and implications of proteinuria and albuminuria. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 2007;37:283295.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9.

    Grauer GF, Greco DS & Getzy DM, et al. Effects of enalapril versus placebo as a treatment for canine idiopathic glomerulonephritis. J Vet Intern Med 2000;14:526533.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10.

    Grodecki KM, Gains MJ & Baumal R, et al. Treatment of X-linked hereditary nephritis in Samoyed dogs with angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor. J Comp Pathol 1997;117:209225.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11.

    Elliot J, Watson ADJ. Chronic kidney disease: staging and management. In: Bonagura JD, Twedt DC, eds. Kirk's current veterinary therapy XIV. St Louis: Saunders, 2008;883892.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12.

    Willard HD, Tvedten H. Urinary disorders. In: Barsanti JA, Lees GE, Willard HD, et al., eds. Small animal clinical diagnosis by laboratory methods. 4th ed. St Louis: Saunders, 2004;140153.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13.

    Gregory CR. Urinary system. In: Latimer KS, Mahaffey EA, Prasse KW, eds. Clinical pathology. 4th ed. Ames, Iowa: Iowa State Press, 2003;231259.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14.

    Reine NJ, Langston CE. Urinalysis interpretation: how to squeeze out the maximum information from a small sample. Clin Tech Small Anim Pract 2005;20:210.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15.

    Barsanti JA, Finco DR. Protein concentration in urine of normal dogs. Am J Vet Res 1979;40:15831588.

  • 16.

    White JV, Olivier NB & Reimann K, et al. Use of protein-to-creatinine ratio in a single urine specimen for quantitative estimation of canine proteinuria. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1984;185:882885.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17.

    Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977;33:159174.

  • 18.

    Glas AS, Lijmerb JG & Prinsc MH, et al. The diagnostic odds ratio: a single indicator of test performance. J Clin Epidemiol 2003;56:11291135.

Advertisement

Comparison of urine protein-to-creatinine ratio in urine samples collected by cystocentesis versus free catch in dogs

View More View Less
  • 1 Sezione di Clinica Medica Veterinaria, Dipartimento di Salute Animale, University of Parma, 43100 Parma, Italy.
  • | 2 Clinica Veterinaria Pirani, Via Majakowski 2/L,M,N, 42100 Reggio Emilia, Italy.
  • | 3 Sezione di Clinica Medica Veterinaria, Dipartimento di Salute Animale, University of Parma, 43100 Parma, Italy.
  • | 4 Department of Veterinary Pathology, Hygiene and Public Health, University of Milan, 20133 Milan, Italy.
  • | 5 Clinic for Small Animal Internal Medicine, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Zürich, CH-8057 Zürich, Switzerland.
  • | 6 Clinica Veterinaria Pirani, Via Majakowski 2/L,M,N, 42100 Reggio Emilia, Italy.
  • | 7 Clinica Veterinaria Pirani, Via Majakowski 2/L,M,N, 42100 Reggio Emilia, Italy.

Abstract

Objective—To assess whether urine protein-to-creatinine (UPC) ratios determined in urine samples collected by cystocentesis versus those collected by free catch provide similar diagnostic information for dogs.

Design—Evaluation study.

Animals—115 client-owned dogs evaluated because of various health problems requiring urinalysis or to screen for proteinuria in an area endemic for leishmaniasis.

Procedures—230 paired urine samples, 1 collected by cystocentesis and 1 by free catch, were collected from the 115 dogs. The UPC ratio was determined in paired urine samples (n = 162) from 81 dogs with no indication of active inflammation according to urine sediment analysis. On the basis of the UPC ratio of urine sample collected by cystocentesis, dogs were classified as nonproteinuric (UPC ratio < 0.2), borderline proteinuric (UPC ratio of 0.2 to 0.5), or proteinuric (UPC ratio > 0.5), according to the International Renal Interest Society (IRIS).

Results—The correlation between UPC ratio in urine samples collected by cystocentesis and by free catch was strong (r2 = 0.90); 75 of 81 (92.6%) dogs had UPC ratios from both urine samples that resulted in classification in the same IRIS substage with a kappa coefficient of 0.83.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—The UPC ratio in dogs was minimally affected in urine samples collected by free catch, thus allowing correct grading of proteinuria with this method. The high reliability of the UPC ratio in free-catch urine samples coupled with the ease of collection should increase the use of this value for assessment of proteinuria.

Abstract

Objective—To assess whether urine protein-to-creatinine (UPC) ratios determined in urine samples collected by cystocentesis versus those collected by free catch provide similar diagnostic information for dogs.

Design—Evaluation study.

Animals—115 client-owned dogs evaluated because of various health problems requiring urinalysis or to screen for proteinuria in an area endemic for leishmaniasis.

Procedures—230 paired urine samples, 1 collected by cystocentesis and 1 by free catch, were collected from the 115 dogs. The UPC ratio was determined in paired urine samples (n = 162) from 81 dogs with no indication of active inflammation according to urine sediment analysis. On the basis of the UPC ratio of urine sample collected by cystocentesis, dogs were classified as nonproteinuric (UPC ratio < 0.2), borderline proteinuric (UPC ratio of 0.2 to 0.5), or proteinuric (UPC ratio > 0.5), according to the International Renal Interest Society (IRIS).

Results—The correlation between UPC ratio in urine samples collected by cystocentesis and by free catch was strong (r2 = 0.90); 75 of 81 (92.6%) dogs had UPC ratios from both urine samples that resulted in classification in the same IRIS substage with a kappa coefficient of 0.83.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—The UPC ratio in dogs was minimally affected in urine samples collected by free catch, thus allowing correct grading of proteinuria with this method. The high reliability of the UPC ratio in free-catch urine samples coupled with the ease of collection should increase the use of this value for assessment of proteinuria.

Contributor Notes

Partially supported by Novartis Italia Animal Health.

Address correspondence to Dr. Zatelli (az@clinicaveterinariapirani.it).