BACKGROUND: Microalbuminuria is an indicator of kidney damage and a risk factor for the progression kidney disease, cardiovascular disease, and so on. Therefore, accurate and precise measurement of urinary albumin is critical. However, there are no reference measurement procedures and reference materials for urinary albumin. METHODS: Nephelometry, turbidimetry, colloidal gold method, radioimmunoassay, and chemiluminescence immunoassay were performed for methodological evaluation, based on imprecision test, recovery rate, linearity, haemoglobin interference rate, and verified reference interval. Then we tested 40 urine samples from diabetic patients by each method, and compared the result between assays. RESULTS: The results indicate that nephelometry is the method with best analytical performance among the five methods, with an average intraassay coefficient of variation (CV) of 2.6%, an average interassay CV of 1.7%, a mean recovery of 99.6%, a linearity of R=1.00 from 2 to 250 mg/l, and an interference rate of <10% at haemoglobin concentrations of <1.82 g/l. The correlation (r) between assays was from 0.701 to 0.982, and the Bland-Altman plots indicated each assay provided significantly different results from each other. CONCLUSION: Nephelometry is the clinical urinary albumin method with best analytical performance in our study.
BACKGROUND: Microalbuminuria is an indicator of kidney damage and a risk factor for the progression kidney disease, cardiovascular disease, and so on. Therefore, accurate and precise measurement of urinary albumin is critical. However, there are no reference measurement procedures and reference materials for urinary albumin. METHODS: Nephelometry, turbidimetry, colloidal gold method, radioimmunoassay, and chemiluminescence immunoassay were performed for methodological evaluation, based on imprecision test, recovery rate, linearity, haemoglobin interference rate, and verified reference interval. Then we tested 40 urine samples from diabeticpatients by each method, and compared the result between assays. RESULTS: The results indicate that nephelometry is the method with best analytical performance among the five methods, with an average intraassay coefficient of variation (CV) of 2.6%, an average interassay CV of 1.7%, a mean recovery of 99.6%, a linearity of R=1.00 from 2 to 250 mg/l, and an interference rate of <10% at haemoglobin concentrations of <1.82 g/l. The correlation (r) between assays was from 0.701 to 0.982, and the Bland-Altman plots indicated each assay provided significantly different results from each other. CONCLUSION: Nephelometry is the clinical urinary albumin method with best analytical performance in our study.
Authors: M I Aguilar; E S O'Meara; S Seliger; W T Longstreth; R G Hart; P E Pergola; M G Shlipak; R Katz; M J Sarnak; D E Rifkin Journal: Neurology Date: 2010-09-01 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Hiddo J Lambers Heerspink; Ron T Gansevoort; Barry M Brenner; Mark E Cooper; Hans Henrik Parving; Shahnaz Shahinfar; Dick de Zeeuw Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2010-07-15 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Jacoline W Brinkman; Stephan J L Bakker; Ron T Gansevoort; Hans L Hillege; Ido P Kema; Reinold O B Gans; Paul E de Jong; Dick de Zeeuw Journal: Kidney Int Suppl Date: 2004-11 Impact factor: 10.545
Authors: Jie J Cao; Mary L Biggs; Joshua Barzilay; Joseph Konen; Bruce M Psaty; Lewis Kuller; Anthony J Bleyer; Jean Olson; Jason Wexler; John Summerson; Mary Cushman Journal: Atherosclerosis Date: 2007-09-17 Impact factor: 5.162
Authors: Jesse C Seegmiller; David R Barnidge; Bradley E Burns; Timothy S Larson; John C Lieske; Rajiv Kumar Journal: Clin Chem Date: 2009-03-26 Impact factor: 8.327
Authors: Aisha Shaikh; Jesse C Seegmiller; Timothy M Borland; Bradley E Burns; Paula M Ladwig; Ravinder J Singh; Rajiv Kumar; Timothy S Larson; John C Lieske Journal: Clin Chem Date: 2008-07-10 Impact factor: 8.327
Authors: W Greg Miller; David E Bruns; Glen L Hortin; Sverre Sandberg; Kristin M Aakre; Matthew J McQueen; Yoshihisa Itoh; John C Lieske; David W Seccombe; Graham Jones; David M Bunk; Gary C Curhan; Andrew S Narva Journal: Clin Chem Date: 2008-11-21 Impact factor: 8.327
Authors: Sandra L Laston; V Saroja Voruganti; Karin Haack; Vallabh O Shah; Arlene Bobelu; Jeanette Bobelu; Donica Ghahate; Antonia M Harford; Susan S Paine; Francesca Tentori; Shelley A Cole; Jean W MacCluer; Anthony G Comuzzie; Philip G Zager Journal: Front Genet Date: 2015-01-30 Impact factor: 4.599