Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for

  • Author or Editor: Francesca Nizi x
  • Refine by Access: All Content x
Clear All Modify Search


Objective—To evaluate a urine dipstick test as a possible replacement for urine protein-tocreatinine (UPC) ratio for identifying proteinuria in dogs.

Sample Population—507 urine samples from adult dogs.

Procedures—Urine dipstick, UPC ratio, specific gravity (USG), and sediment testing were performed on 507 samples. With UPC ratio as the reference criterion, diagnostic accuracy of the urine dipstick test was calculated for the entire data set and for urine samples grouped by USG (≤ 1.012 or > 1.012; < 1.030 or ≥ 1.030). A UPC ratio < 0.2 was used to indicate absence of proteinuria.

Results—The sensitivity of the urine dipstick test for detection of proteinuria was > 90% when 0 mg of protein/dL (a 0+ result) was used to indicate a negative test result, and the specificity ranged from 40% to 60%, depending on the USG. Sensitivity decreased to a range of 56% to 81% when 30 mg of protein/dL (a 1+ result) was used as the cutoff, depending on the USG, but the specificity increased to > 90%. The likelihood of correctly identifying nonproteinuric dogs was low when the USG was ≤ 1.012, particularly when samples with a 1+ result were considered negative.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—For dogs with a dipstick-test result of 1+ and USG ≤ 1.012, proteinuria should be assessed by use of the UPC ratio; dogs with a USG value > 1.012 are likely nonproteinuric. When used together, the urine dipstick test and USG measurement were reliable as a rapid alternative to UPC ratio determination in dogs in this study.

Full access
in American Journal of Veterinary Research


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 (r 2 = 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.

Full access
in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association