Comparison of Single,Averaged, and Pooled Urine Protein:Creatinine Ratios in Proteinuric Dogs Undergoing Medical Treatment |
| |
| Authors: | S Shropshire J Quimby R Cerda |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. Colorado State University, CO;2. Arapahoe Animal Hospital, Boulder, CO |
| |
| Abstract: | Background Monitoring urine protein:creatinine ratios (UPC ) in dogs with protein‐losing nephropathy (PLN ) is challenging because of day‐to‐day variation in UPC results. Hypothesis/Objectives Determine whether single, averaged, or pooled samples from PLN dogs receiving medical treatment yield comparable UPC s, regardless of degree of proteinuria. Animals Twenty‐five client‐owned PLN dogs receiving medical treatment. Methods UPC ratios were prospectively measured in each dog utilizing 3 methods: single in‐hospital sample (day 3), average sample (days 1–3), and pooled sample (equal pooling of urine from days 1–3). Bland‐Altman analysis was performed to evaluate agreement between methods for all dogs, as well as in subgroups of dogs (UPC ≤4 or UPC >4). Results For all dogs, Bland‐Altman log‐transformed 95% limits of agreement were ?0.07–0.18 (single versus pooled UPC ), ?0.06–0.16 (single versus average UPC ), and ?0.06–0.04 (pooled versus average UPC ). For dogs with UPC ≤4, Bland‐Altman 95% limits of agreement were ?0.42–0.82 (single versus pooled UPC ), ?0.38–0.76 (single versus average UPC ), and ?0.27–0.25 (pooled versus average UPC ). For dogs with UPC >4, Bland‐Altman 95% limits of agreement were ?0.17–2.4 (single versus pooled UPC ), ?0.40–2.2 (single versus average UPC ), and ?0.85–0.43 (pooled versus average UPC ). Conclusions and Clinical Importance UPC ratios from all methods were comparable in PLN dogs receiving medical treatment. In PLN dogs with UPC >4, more variability between methods exists likely because of higher in‐hospital results, but whether this finding is clinically relevant is unknown. |
| |
| Keywords: | Protein‐losing nephropathy Proteinuria Variability |
|
|
