Prevalence of Proteinuria and Other Abnormalities in Urinalysis Performed in the Urology Clinic
Abstract Objective To compare the prevalence of proteinuria in the urology clinic with other outpatient settings. Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is classified according to cause, GFR, and proteinuria. Proteinuria may be more prevalent patients with known CKD, renal disorders (benign or malignant), and...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Urology (Ridgewood, N.J.) N.J.), 2017-05, Vol.103, p.34-38 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 38 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | |
| container_start_page | 34 |
| container_title | Urology (Ridgewood, N.J.) |
| container_volume | 103 |
| creator | Bezinque, Adam Noyes, Sabrina L Kirmiz, Samer Parker, Jessica Dey, Sumi Kahnoski, Richard J Lane, Brian R |
| description | Abstract Objective To compare the prevalence of proteinuria in the urology clinic with other outpatient settings. Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is classified according to cause, GFR, and proteinuria. Proteinuria may be more prevalent patients with known CKD, renal disorders (benign or malignant), and/or after urologic surgery. Methods Cross-sectional study of 3 populations undergoing urinalysis (UA) testing: general outpatients (n=20,334), urology outpatients (n=5,023), and kidney cancer patients (n=1,016). Proteinuria was classified under KDIGO guidelines: A1 (300mg). Results Proteinuria was detected throughout a community-based health system in 8.6% of UA (8.2%:A2; 0.4%:A3). In comparison, 18.6% of urology office-performed UA had proteinuria (16.0 %:A2, 2.5%:A3) (p |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.urology.2017.02.011 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1869968517</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>1_s2_0_S0090429517301413</els_id><sourcerecordid>1869968517</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c364t-f675aa148e73119622e437b6508805f4f333159abc51562b7c726049d48ee33</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo9kU9v3CAQxVGVqtmm_QipOOZilwED5lIpWqV_pEhZKe0ZYe-4ZcOaFOxI--2Dd7c9Ic28N7z5DSHXwGpgoD7v6jnFEH8fas5A14zXDOANWYHkujLGyAuyYsywquFGXpL3Oe8YY0op_Y5c8pYDbyVfEbtJ-OICjj3SONBNihP6cU7eUTdu6cP0BxO97caY9i74yWOmfqS_kh9dOGSf6QbTUJq4XepFXXrHWHQd_Oj7D-Tt4ELGj-f3ijx-vfu5_l7dP3z7sb69r3qhmqkalJbOQdOiFgBGcY6N0J2SrG2ZHJpBCAHSuK6XIBXvdK-5Yo3ZFgcKcUVuTlOfU_w7Y57s3uceQ3AjxjlbaJUxqpWgi1SepH2KOScc7HPye5cOFphdyNqdPZO1C1nLuC1ki-_T-Yu5K9v-d_1DWQRfTgIsa754TLY_EnDhCQ-Yd3FOhVnJYnOZaB-X4yy3KZkYNCDEKyxEi4k</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1869968517</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Prevalence of Proteinuria and Other Abnormalities in Urinalysis Performed in the Urology Clinic</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Bezinque, Adam ; Noyes, Sabrina L ; Kirmiz, Samer ; Parker, Jessica ; Dey, Sumi ; Kahnoski, Richard J ; Lane, Brian R</creator><creatorcontrib>Bezinque, Adam ; Noyes, Sabrina L ; Kirmiz, Samer ; Parker, Jessica ; Dey, Sumi ; Kahnoski, Richard J ; Lane, Brian R</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract Objective To compare the prevalence of proteinuria in the urology clinic with other outpatient settings. Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is classified according to cause, GFR, and proteinuria. Proteinuria may be more prevalent patients with known CKD, renal disorders (benign or malignant), and/or after urologic surgery. Methods Cross-sectional study of 3 populations undergoing urinalysis (UA) testing: general outpatients (n=20,334), urology outpatients (n=5,023), and kidney cancer patients (n=1,016). Proteinuria was classified under KDIGO guidelines: A1 (<30mg), A2 (30- 300mg), and A3 (>300mg). Results Proteinuria was detected throughout a community-based health system in 8.6% of UA (8.2%:A2; 0.4%:A3). In comparison, 18.6% of urology office-performed UA had proteinuria (16.0 %:A2, 2.5%:A3) (p<0.0001 vs. non-urology). Kidney cancer patients were more likely to have proteinuria (17.9%:A2, 3.8%:A3). The proportion with A3 was significantly higher in urology and kidney cancer patients when compared with other outpatients (each p<0.0001), and for the kidney cancer subgroup compared with all urology patients (p<0.0001). Additional abnormalities were frequently present on microscopic analysis of UA in the urology clinic, including hematuria (20.9%), pyuria (21.8%), and bacteriuria (3.1%). Conclusion The value of UA in the urology clinic as a screening test for proteinuria and other conditions appears high, with >56% having at least 1 abnormality. The population risk of proteinuria in the urology clinic is 18.5%, which is higher than observed in non-urology clinics. Patients with kidney cancer appear more likely to have proteinuria then the average urology patient. We recommend evaluation of urology patients with UA to identify proteinuria.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0090-4295</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1527-9995</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2017.02.011</identifier><identifier>PMID: 28212852</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States</publisher><subject>Cohort Studies ; Cross-Sectional Studies ; Glomerular Filtration Rate ; Hematuria ; Humans ; Hydrogen-Ion Concentration ; Kidney Failure, Chronic - therapy ; Kidney Neoplasms - therapy ; Prevalence ; Proteinuria - diagnosis ; Proteinuria - epidemiology ; Proteinuria - urine ; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic - diagnosis ; Risk Factors ; Urinalysis ; Urology</subject><ispartof>Urology (Ridgewood, N.J.), 2017-05, Vol.103, p.34-38</ispartof><rights>Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c364t-f675aa148e73119622e437b6508805f4f333159abc51562b7c726049d48ee33</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c364t-f675aa148e73119622e437b6508805f4f333159abc51562b7c726049d48ee33</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-1553-6372</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28212852$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bezinque, Adam</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Noyes, Sabrina L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kirmiz, Samer</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Parker, Jessica</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dey, Sumi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kahnoski, Richard J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lane, Brian R</creatorcontrib><title>Prevalence of Proteinuria and Other Abnormalities in Urinalysis Performed in the Urology Clinic</title><title>Urology (Ridgewood, N.J.)</title><addtitle>Urology</addtitle><description>Abstract Objective To compare the prevalence of proteinuria in the urology clinic with other outpatient settings. Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is classified according to cause, GFR, and proteinuria. Proteinuria may be more prevalent patients with known CKD, renal disorders (benign or malignant), and/or after urologic surgery. Methods Cross-sectional study of 3 populations undergoing urinalysis (UA) testing: general outpatients (n=20,334), urology outpatients (n=5,023), and kidney cancer patients (n=1,016). Proteinuria was classified under KDIGO guidelines: A1 (<30mg), A2 (30- 300mg), and A3 (>300mg). Results Proteinuria was detected throughout a community-based health system in 8.6% of UA (8.2%:A2; 0.4%:A3). In comparison, 18.6% of urology office-performed UA had proteinuria (16.0 %:A2, 2.5%:A3) (p<0.0001 vs. non-urology). Kidney cancer patients were more likely to have proteinuria (17.9%:A2, 3.8%:A3). The proportion with A3 was significantly higher in urology and kidney cancer patients when compared with other outpatients (each p<0.0001), and for the kidney cancer subgroup compared with all urology patients (p<0.0001). Additional abnormalities were frequently present on microscopic analysis of UA in the urology clinic, including hematuria (20.9%), pyuria (21.8%), and bacteriuria (3.1%). Conclusion The value of UA in the urology clinic as a screening test for proteinuria and other conditions appears high, with >56% having at least 1 abnormality. The population risk of proteinuria in the urology clinic is 18.5%, which is higher than observed in non-urology clinics. Patients with kidney cancer appear more likely to have proteinuria then the average urology patient. We recommend evaluation of urology patients with UA to identify proteinuria.</description><subject>Cohort Studies</subject><subject>Cross-Sectional Studies</subject><subject>Glomerular Filtration Rate</subject><subject>Hematuria</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Hydrogen-Ion Concentration</subject><subject>Kidney Failure, Chronic - therapy</subject><subject>Kidney Neoplasms - therapy</subject><subject>Prevalence</subject><subject>Proteinuria - diagnosis</subject><subject>Proteinuria - epidemiology</subject><subject>Proteinuria - urine</subject><subject>Renal Insufficiency, Chronic - diagnosis</subject><subject>Risk Factors</subject><subject>Urinalysis</subject><subject>Urology</subject><issn>0090-4295</issn><issn>1527-9995</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNo9kU9v3CAQxVGVqtmm_QipOOZilwED5lIpWqV_pEhZKe0ZYe-4ZcOaFOxI--2Dd7c9Ic28N7z5DSHXwGpgoD7v6jnFEH8fas5A14zXDOANWYHkujLGyAuyYsywquFGXpL3Oe8YY0op_Y5c8pYDbyVfEbtJ-OICjj3SONBNihP6cU7eUTdu6cP0BxO97caY9i74yWOmfqS_kh9dOGSf6QbTUJq4XepFXXrHWHQd_Oj7D-Tt4ELGj-f3ijx-vfu5_l7dP3z7sb69r3qhmqkalJbOQdOiFgBGcY6N0J2SrG2ZHJpBCAHSuK6XIBXvdK-5Yo3ZFgcKcUVuTlOfU_w7Y57s3uceQ3AjxjlbaJUxqpWgi1SepH2KOScc7HPye5cOFphdyNqdPZO1C1nLuC1ki-_T-Yu5K9v-d_1DWQRfTgIsa754TLY_EnDhCQ-Yd3FOhVnJYnOZaB-X4yy3KZkYNCDEKyxEi4k</recordid><startdate>20170501</startdate><enddate>20170501</enddate><creator>Bezinque, Adam</creator><creator>Noyes, Sabrina L</creator><creator>Kirmiz, Samer</creator><creator>Parker, Jessica</creator><creator>Dey, Sumi</creator><creator>Kahnoski, Richard J</creator><creator>Lane, Brian R</creator><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1553-6372</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20170501</creationdate><title>Prevalence of Proteinuria and Other Abnormalities in Urinalysis Performed in the Urology Clinic</title><author>Bezinque, Adam ; Noyes, Sabrina L ; Kirmiz, Samer ; Parker, Jessica ; Dey, Sumi ; Kahnoski, Richard J ; Lane, Brian R</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c364t-f675aa148e73119622e437b6508805f4f333159abc51562b7c726049d48ee33</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Cohort Studies</topic><topic>Cross-Sectional Studies</topic><topic>Glomerular Filtration Rate</topic><topic>Hematuria</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Hydrogen-Ion Concentration</topic><topic>Kidney Failure, Chronic - therapy</topic><topic>Kidney Neoplasms - therapy</topic><topic>Prevalence</topic><topic>Proteinuria - diagnosis</topic><topic>Proteinuria - epidemiology</topic><topic>Proteinuria - urine</topic><topic>Renal Insufficiency, Chronic - diagnosis</topic><topic>Risk Factors</topic><topic>Urinalysis</topic><topic>Urology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bezinque, Adam</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Noyes, Sabrina L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kirmiz, Samer</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Parker, Jessica</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dey, Sumi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kahnoski, Richard J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lane, Brian R</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Urology (Ridgewood, N.J.)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bezinque, Adam</au><au>Noyes, Sabrina L</au><au>Kirmiz, Samer</au><au>Parker, Jessica</au><au>Dey, Sumi</au><au>Kahnoski, Richard J</au><au>Lane, Brian R</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Prevalence of Proteinuria and Other Abnormalities in Urinalysis Performed in the Urology Clinic</atitle><jtitle>Urology (Ridgewood, N.J.)</jtitle><addtitle>Urology</addtitle><date>2017-05-01</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>103</volume><spage>34</spage><epage>38</epage><pages>34-38</pages><issn>0090-4295</issn><eissn>1527-9995</eissn><abstract>Abstract Objective To compare the prevalence of proteinuria in the urology clinic with other outpatient settings. Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is classified according to cause, GFR, and proteinuria. Proteinuria may be more prevalent patients with known CKD, renal disorders (benign or malignant), and/or after urologic surgery. Methods Cross-sectional study of 3 populations undergoing urinalysis (UA) testing: general outpatients (n=20,334), urology outpatients (n=5,023), and kidney cancer patients (n=1,016). Proteinuria was classified under KDIGO guidelines: A1 (<30mg), A2 (30- 300mg), and A3 (>300mg). Results Proteinuria was detected throughout a community-based health system in 8.6% of UA (8.2%:A2; 0.4%:A3). In comparison, 18.6% of urology office-performed UA had proteinuria (16.0 %:A2, 2.5%:A3) (p<0.0001 vs. non-urology). Kidney cancer patients were more likely to have proteinuria (17.9%:A2, 3.8%:A3). The proportion with A3 was significantly higher in urology and kidney cancer patients when compared with other outpatients (each p<0.0001), and for the kidney cancer subgroup compared with all urology patients (p<0.0001). Additional abnormalities were frequently present on microscopic analysis of UA in the urology clinic, including hematuria (20.9%), pyuria (21.8%), and bacteriuria (3.1%). Conclusion The value of UA in the urology clinic as a screening test for proteinuria and other conditions appears high, with >56% having at least 1 abnormality. The population risk of proteinuria in the urology clinic is 18.5%, which is higher than observed in non-urology clinics. Patients with kidney cancer appear more likely to have proteinuria then the average urology patient. We recommend evaluation of urology patients with UA to identify proteinuria.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pmid>28212852</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.urology.2017.02.011</doi><tpages>5</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1553-6372</orcidid></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0090-4295 |
| ispartof | Urology (Ridgewood, N.J.), 2017-05, Vol.103, p.34-38 |
| issn | 0090-4295 1527-9995 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1869968517 |
| source | MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals |
| subjects | Cohort Studies Cross-Sectional Studies Glomerular Filtration Rate Hematuria Humans Hydrogen-Ion Concentration Kidney Failure, Chronic - therapy Kidney Neoplasms - therapy Prevalence Proteinuria - diagnosis Proteinuria - epidemiology Proteinuria - urine Renal Insufficiency, Chronic - diagnosis Risk Factors Urinalysis Urology |
| title | Prevalence of Proteinuria and Other Abnormalities in Urinalysis Performed in the Urology Clinic |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-03T14%3A48%3A55IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Prevalence%20of%20Proteinuria%20and%20Other%20Abnormalities%20in%20Urinalysis%20Performed%20in%20the%20Urology%20Clinic&rft.jtitle=Urology%20(Ridgewood,%20N.J.)&rft.au=Bezinque,%20Adam&rft.date=2017-05-01&rft.volume=103&rft.spage=34&rft.epage=38&rft.pages=34-38&rft.issn=0090-4295&rft.eissn=1527-9995&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.urology.2017.02.011&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1869968517%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1869968517&rft_id=info:pmid/28212852&rft_els_id=1_s2_0_S0090429517301413&rfr_iscdi=true |