OBJECTIVE: To investigate the diagnostic accuracy of the protein-to-creatinine ratio from random urine collections to confirm the presence of proteinuria in women being evaluated for preeclampsia. STUDY DESIGN: Eligible studies, published between January 1966 and April 2010, were retrieved through general bibliographic databases. Accuracy of the protein-to-creatinine ratio was estimated compared with a 24- hour urine collection. Pooled estimates of diagnostic measures were calculated. A random-effects bivariate model was employed. RESULTS: Twenty-four trials with 3,186 aggregate participants met inclusion criteria. Pooled sensitivities and specificities were 91.0% (95%CI 87.0 - 93.9) and 86.3% (95% CI 78.4 - 91.7) respectively. Pooled positive likelihood ratio was 6.7 (95% CI 4.1, 10.9) and pooled negative likelihood ratio 0.10 (95%CI 0.07, 0.16). Meta-regression analysis found that test accuracy was not affected by any of the co-variables explored. CONCLUSION: A random urine protein-to-creatinine ratio provides useful evidence to rule out the presence of significant proteinuria in patients at risk for preeclampsia. It appears that a cut-off value of > 0.30 is associated with the best accuracy. CONDENSATION: The protein-to-creatinine ratio from a random urine sample provides useful evidence to rule out the presence of significant proteinuria in patients at risk for preeclampsia.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the diagnostic accuracy of the protein-to-creatinine ratio from random urine collections to confirm the presence of proteinuria in women being evaluated for preeclampsia. STUDY DESIGN: Eligible studies, published between January 1966 and April 2010, were retrieved through general bibliographic databases. Accuracy of the protein-to-creatinine ratio was estimated compared with a 24- hour urine collection. Pooled estimates of diagnostic measures were calculated. A random-effects bivariate model was employed. RESULTS: Twenty-four trials with 3,186 aggregate participants met inclusion criteria. Pooled sensitivities and specificities were 91.0% (95%CI 87.0 - 93.9) and 86.3% (95% CI 78.4 - 91.7) respectively. Pooled positive likelihood ratio was 6.7 (95% CI 4.1, 10.9) and pooled negative likelihood ratio 0.10 (95%CI 0.07, 0.16). Meta-regression analysis found that test accuracy was not affected by any of the co-variables explored. CONCLUSION: A random urine protein-to-creatinine ratio provides useful evidence to rule out the presence of significant proteinuria in patients at risk for preeclampsia. It appears that a cut-off value of > 0.30 is associated with the best accuracy. CONDENSATION: The protein-to-creatinine ratio from a random urine sample provides useful evidence to rule out the presence of significant proteinuria in patients at risk for preeclampsia.
Authors: Vineet V Mishra; Preeti A Goyal; Roy Priyankur; S Choudhary; Rohina S Aggarwal; Khushali Gandhi; Bhumika Vyas; Shaheen Hokabaj Journal: J Obstet Gynaecol India Date: 2016-11-30
Authors: Marie C Hogan; Heather N Reich; Peter J Nelson; Sharon G Adler; Daniel C Cattran; Gerald B Appel; Debbie S Gipson; Matthias Kretzler; Jonathan P Troost; John C Lieske Journal: Kidney Int Date: 2016-08-12 Impact factor: 10.612
Authors: John Allotey; Kym Ie Snell; Melanie Smuk; Richard Hooper; Claire L Chan; Asif Ahmed; Lucy C Chappell; Peter von Dadelszen; Julie Dodds; Marcus Green; Louise Kenny; Asma Khalil; Khalid S Khan; Ben W Mol; Jenny Myers; Lucilla Poston; Basky Thilaganathan; Anne C Staff; Gordon Cs Smith; Wessel Ganzevoort; Hannele Laivuori; Anthony O Odibo; Javier A Ramírez; John Kingdom; George Daskalakis; Diane Farrar; Ahmet A Baschat; Paul T Seed; Federico Prefumo; Fabricio da Silva Costa; Henk Groen; Francois Audibert; Jacques Masse; Ragnhild B Skråstad; Kjell Å Salvesen; Camilla Haavaldsen; Chie Nagata; Alice R Rumbold; Seppo Heinonen; Lisa M Askie; Luc Jm Smits; Christina A Vinter; Per M Magnus; Kajantie Eero; Pia M Villa; Anne K Jenum; Louise B Andersen; Jane E Norman; Akihide Ohkuchi; Anne Eskild; Sohinee Bhattacharya; Fionnuala M McAuliffe; Alberto Galindo; Ignacio Herraiz; Lionel Carbillon; Kerstin Klipstein-Grobusch; SeonAe Yeo; Helena J Teede; Joyce L Browne; Karel Gm Moons; Richard D Riley; Shakila Thangaratinam Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2020-12 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: Katarzyna Stefańska; Maciej Zieliński; Dorota Zamkowska; Przemysław Adamski; Joanna Jassem-Bobowicz; Karolina Piekarska; Martyna Jankowiak; Katarzyna Leszczyńska; Renata Świątkowska-Stodulska; Krzysztof Preis; Piotr Trzonkowski; Natalia Marek-Trzonkowska Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-06-12 Impact factor: 3.390