4.5 Review

Diagnostic accuracy of urinary spot protein:creatinine ratio for proteinuria in hypertensive pregnant women:: systematic review

Journal

BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL
Volume 336, Issue 7651, Pages 1003-1006

Publisher

B M J PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.39532.543947.BE

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective To review the spot protein:creatinine ratio and albumin:creatinine ratio as diagnostic tests for significant proteinuria in hypertensive pregnant women. Design Systematic review. Data sources Medline and Embase, the Cochrane Library, reference lists, and experts. Review methods Literature search (1980-2007) for articles of the spot protein:creatinine ratio or albumin: creatinine ratio in hypertensive pregnancy, with 24 hour proteinuria as the comparator. Results 13 studies concerned the spot protein: creatinine ratio (1214 women with primarily gestational hypertension). Nine studies reported sensitivity and specificity for eight cut-off points, median 24 mg/mmol (range 17-57 mg/mmol; 0.15-0.50 mg/mg). Laboratory assays were not well described. Diagnostic test characteristics were recalculated for a cut-off point of 30,mg/mmol. No significant heterogeneity in cut-off points was found between studies over a range of proteinuria. Pooled values gave a sensitivity of 83.6% (95% confidence interval 77.5% to 89.7%), specificity of 76.3% (72.6% to 80.0%), positive likelihood ratio of 3.53 (2.83 to 4.49), and negative likelihood ratio of 0.21 (0.13 to 0.31) (nine studies, 1003 women). Two studies of the spot albumin:creatinine ratio (225 women) found optimal cut-off points of 2 mg/mmol for proteinuria of 0.3 g/day or more and 27 mg/mmol for albuminuria. Conclusion The spot protein:creatinine ratio is a reasonable rule-out test for detecting proteinuria of 0.3 g/day or more in hypertensive pregnancy. Information on use of the spot albumin:creatinine ratio in these women is insufficient.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available