Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

A comparison between two screening methods for detection of microproteinuria

1995; Elsevier BV; Volume: 173; Issue: 4 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1016/0002-9378(95)91335-1

1097-6868

Kenneth Higby, Cheryl R. Suiter, Theresa M. Siler-Khodr,

Renal Diseases and Glomerulopathies

We compared two screening tests for microproteinuria with 24-hour quantitative measurements to determine which method is better at predicting clinically significant proteinuria.We obtained 690 24-hour urine collections from both low- and high-risk patients seen for prenatal care. Qualitative screening for microproteinuria on the basis of the protein-error-of-indicators principle (Ames Multistix 10SG and Micro-bumintest, Miles Diagnostic Division, Elkhart, Ind.) was done by the same investigator (C.S.). Quantitative assay was done by use of pyrogallol red-molybdate for total protein and by radioimmunoassay for albumin.The Micro-bumintest had a sensitivity of 87% compared with 36% for the Multistix 10SG. It also had a higher specificity and higher positive and negative predictive values. The Micro-bumintest was a better screening test in patients with significant protein excretion (> 300 mg/24 hours).The Micro-bumintest has a much higher sensitivity and a lower false-negative rate than does the Multistix 10SG. Our data support the Micro-bumintest as a better screening test for clinically significant proteinuria.