Editor-in-chief
Maria Stella Graziani

Deputy Director
Martina Zaninotto

Associate Editors
Ferruccio Ceriotti
Davide Giavarina
Bruna Lo Sasso
Giampaolo Merlini
Martina Montagnana
Andrea Mosca
Paola Pezzati
Rossella Tomaiuolo
Matteo Vidali

International Advisory Board Khosrow Adeli Canada
Sergio Bernardini Italy
Marcello Ciaccio Italy
Eleftherios Diamandis Canada
Philippe Gillery France
Kjell Grankvist Sweden
Hans Jacobs The Netherlands
Eric Kilpatrick UK
Magdalena Krintus Poland
Giuseppe Lippi Italy
☩Howard Morris Australia
Mario Plebani Italy
Sverre Sandberg Norway
Ana-Maria Simundic Croatia
☩Jill Tate Australia
Tommaso Trenti Italy
Cas Weykamp The Netherlands
Maria Willrich USA
Paul Yip Canada


Publisher
Biomedia srl
Via L. Temolo 4, 20126 Milano

Responsible Editor
Giuseppe Agosta

Editorial Secretary
Arianna Lucini Paioni
Biomedia srl
Via L. Temolo 4, 20126 Milano
Tel. 0245498282
email: biochimica.clinica@sibioc.it



Area soci
Non possiedi o non ricordi la password!
Clicca qui

BC: Articoli scritti da T. Köken

Armonizzazione in Medicina di Laboratorio
Harmonization in Laboratory Medicine
Biochimica Clinica ; 39(6) 546-547
Editoriale - Editorial
 
URIT 11F dipstick for proteinuria testing: comparison with quantitative protein assay and evaluation of the diagnostic accuracy for proteinuria detection in a outpatient population
T. Köken  |  N. Doğan  | 
<p>The purpose of this study is to evaluate the diagnostic performances of URIT 11F urine dipstick assay for the<br />detection of proteinuria comparing it with a quantitative method. 5743 urine test results [urine dipstick, urine protein<br />and creatinine concentrations and the calculated protein to creatinine ratio (PCR)] were collected from outpatients<br />with various clinical conditions. The agreement between the URIT 11F urine dipstick and quantitative protein assay<br />was examined. To evaluate the accuracy of urine dipstick results for proteinuria detection, we used two different cutoffs:<br />PCR &ge;200 mg/g and &ge;150 mg/g. Dipstick test results (negative, trace, 1+, 2+, 3+) were allocated to five levels<br />of urine protein concentration (&lt;14, 14-30, 30.1-100, 100.1-300, &gt;300 mg/dL) respectively. There was an agreement<br />with a Kappa coefficient of 0.341 and p&lt;0.001. When PCR &ge;200 mg/g was used as cut-off and &ldquo;&gt; negative&rdquo; was<br />classified as a positive dipstick result, the agreement of the URIT 11F dipsticks improved substantially. The findings<br />of our study show a fair agreement between URIT 11F dipstick results and the quantitative method for urine protein.<br />However, our results show also a high number of false negative results with dipstick testing. While second level<br />laboratory testing can eliminate the false positive results, false negative results could cause a delay in beneficial early<br />treatment of incipient nephropathy. For this reason, more sensitive proteinuria screening test for patients with<br />potential early stage renal diseases should be used.</p>
Biochimica Clinica ; 17(1)
Contributi scientifici - Scientific papers