4.4 Article

Effect of common storage temperatures and container types on urine protein : creatinine ratios in urine samples of proteinuric dogs

期刊

JOURNAL OF VETERINARY INTERNAL MEDICINE
卷 32, 期 5, 页码 1652-1658

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jvim.15232

关键词

adsorption; homopolymer polypropylene (HP); plastic; propylene copolymer (PC); proteinuria

资金

  1. University of Florida CVM Resident's Intramural Competitive Grants Program

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BackgroundHypothesis/ObjectivesPreanalytic protein adsorption to polymer and glass container surfaces may decrease urine protein concentration measurements and urine protein: creatinine ratios (UPC). Urine stored in PC or glass containers will have lower UPC than urine stored in HP containers. The specific objective was to determine whether clinically relevant differences in UPC would be detected after storage in glass, PC, or HP containers using common storage times and temperatures. AnimalsMethodsTwelve client-owned dogs with proteinuria. Prospective, nonmasked study, divided into 2 phases. The first phase was a pilot study involving multiple (n=5) measurements at each storage condition using 24-hours urine samples from 2 dogs with persistent renal proteinuria of different magnitude. The second phase used urine samples from 10 dogs with proteinuria of variable magnitude. Sample aliquots were stored in HP, PC, and glass containers at 24 degrees C for 4 hours, 4 degrees C for 12 hours, and -20 degrees C for 72 hours. The UPC of each was measured after storage and compared with baseline. ResultsConclusions and Clinical ImportanceStatistically significant but clinically irrelevant differences were found in phase 1. In phase 2, storage conditions did not affect urinary protein or creatinine concentrations or UPC. Collection and storage of canine urine samples in clean HP, PC, or glass containers at 24 degrees C for 4 hours, 4 degrees C for 12 hours, or -20 degrees C for 72 hours is unlikely to result in clinically relevant decreases in measured UPC values.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据