Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
How to detect albumin in dog and cat urine samples
By Lyon, Shane D et al.·Published in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association·2010·Department of Clinical Sciences, United States·View original on PubMed →
PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →
Original publication title: Comparison of urine dipstick, sulfosalicylic acid, urine protein-to-creatinine ratio, and species-specific ELISA methods for detection of albumin in urine samples of cats and dogs.
Plain-English summary
A study looked at different methods for detecting protein in the urine of dogs and cats, which can indicate kidney issues. The urine dipstick and sulfosalicylic acid tests showed moderate to poor accuracy in dogs and very low accuracy in cats, especially for weak positive results. However, when stronger positive results were considered, the accuracy improved significantly. The urine protein-to-creatinine ratio test was found to be very reliable for both species, but it missed many cases. Pet owners should be cautious about relying solely on dipstick or SSA tests for diagnosing kidney problems in their pets.
People also search for: dog urine test for kidney disease · cat protein in urine test results · urine protein-to-creatinine ratio in dogs and cats
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the use of dipstick, sulfosalicylic acid (SSA), and urine protein-to-creatinine ratio (UP:C) methods for use in detection of canine and feline albuminuria. DESIGN: Evaluation study. SAMPLE POPULATION: 599 canine and 347 feline urine samples. PROCEDURES: Urine was analyzed by use of dipstick, SSA, and UP:C methods; results were compared with those for a species-specific ELISA to determine sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value, and positive and negative likelihood ratios. RESULTS: Positive results for dipstick and SSA tests (trace reaction or greater) in canine urine had moderate specificity (dipstick, 81.2%; SSA, 73.3%) and poor PPV (dipstick, 34.0%; SSA, 41.8%). Values improved when stronger positive results (>or= 2+) for the dipstick and SSA tests were compared with ELISA results (specificity, 98.9% and 99.0% for the urine dipstick and SSA tests, respectively; PPV, 90.7% and 90.2% for the dipstick and SSA tests, respectively). Data obtained for cats revealed poor specificity (dipstick, 11.0%; SSA, 25.4%) and PPV (dipstick, 55.6%; SSA, 46.9%). Values improved slightly when stronger positive test results (>or= 2+) were used (specificity, 80.0% and 94.2% for the dipstick and SSA tests, respectively; PPV, 63.5% and 65.2% for the dipstick and SSA tests, respectively). The UP:C had high specificity for albuminuria in dogs and cats (99.7% and 99.2%, respectively) but low sensitivity (28.7% and 2.0%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Caution should be used when interpreting a positive test result of a dipstick or SSA test for canine or feline albuminuria.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases →Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20392184/