4.6 Article

Feasibility of nephrinuria as a screening tool for the risk of pre-eclampsia: prospective observational study

Journal

BMJ OPEN
Volume 6, Issue 8, Pages -

Publisher

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011229

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Ministry of Education, Science, Sports and Culture of Japan [25462546]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives: To investigate the possibility of nephrinuria as a screening tool for the risk of pre-eclampsia (PE). Design: Prospective observational study. Setting: A single university hospital. Changes in urinary nephrin: creatinine ratio (NCR, ng/mg) and protein: creatinine ratio (PCR, mg/mg) in pregnancy were determined. Significant proteinuria in pregnancy (SPIP) was defined as PCR> 0.27. PE was diagnosed in women with both SPIP and hypertension. Participants: 89 pregnant women in whom neither hypertension nor SPIP was present at enrolment, providing 31, 125 and 93 random urine samples during first, second and third trimesters, respectively. Results: PE developed in 14 of the 89 women. NCR increased with increasing PCR in 14 women with PE (correlation coefficient, 0.862; p<0.0001). In contrast, NCR did not change significantly despite significant increases in PCR in 75 women with normotensive pregnancies defined as neither SPIP nor hypertension, indicating that there was little increase in nephrinuria over the physiological range of proteinuria in pregnancy. Relative risk of later development of PE among asymptomatic second and third trimester women with NCR (ng/mg) > 122 (95th centile value for 75 women with normotensive pregnancies) was 5.93 (95% CI 2.59 to 13.6; 60% (6/10) vs 10% (8/79)) and 13.5 (95% CI 3.31 to 55.0; 75% (6/8) vs 5.5% (2/36)), respectively, compared with women with NCR <= 122 at that time. Conclusions: Nephrinuria was unlikely to increase in normal pregnancy. A certain NCR cut-off may efficiently differentiate women at higher risk of PE.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available