The effect of substrate composition and storage time on urine specific gravity in dogs

Comparison of cystocentesis versus home sampling to determine urinary protein: Creatinine ratio and urine specific gravity in cats

BACKGROUND

Urinalysis is necessary for the diagnostic evaluation of chronic kidney disease in cats. Performing cystocentesis is not always feasible, but data comparing urine obtained by cystocentesis in the clinic with voided samples collected at home are lacking in cats.

OBJECTIVES

To compare urinary protein:creatinine ratio (UPC) and urine specific gravity (USG) and to detect clinically relevant changes in proteinuria substage or urine concentration between urine collected at home and in-clinic by cystocentesis in cats.

ANIMALS

Ninety-two healthy and diseased client-owned cats.

METHODS

Prospective study. Owners collected voided urine at home and within 1 to 15 hours, cystocentesis was performed in the clinic.

RESULTS

In a subset of motivated owners, 55% succeeded in collecting urine at home. Overall, UPC was higher (mean ±SD difference = 0.09 ±0.22; P < .001) and USG was lower (mean ±SD difference = -0.006 ±0.009; P < .001) in cystocentesis samples than in voided urine. Substantial agreement existed between sampling methods for UPC (weighted к = 0.68) and USG (к = 0.64) categories. A different proteinuria substage (UPC < 0.2, 0.2-0.4, >0.4) was present in paired urine samples from 28% of cats. In 18% of cats, urine concentrating ability (USG < or ≥1.035) differed between both samples.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE

Home sampling of urine is a valid alternative to cystocentesis in cats. However, because clinically relevant differences in UPC and USG were present in 28% and 18% of cats, respectively, by the same collection method for monitoring each cat is advised.

[Urinalysis in dogs and cats, part 1: physical and chemical urinalysis]

The urinalysis of dogs and cats is an important part of the diagnostic evaluation of urinary tract diseases as well as for the identification of systemic diseases. A routine urinalysis consists of a physical and chemical examination of the urine as well as an examination of the urine sediment. Various urine collection methods (free-catch, catheterization, cystocentesis) are available. Each method has multiple advantages and disadvantages. The appropriate method must be chosen individually for each patient depending on the emphasis of the examination. The urine should ideally be examined within 30 minutes of collection as it is prone to change due to time and storage. Physical examination of the urine consists of the determination of urine color, clarity, and specific gravity which provides information regarding the concentration of the urine. The latter is determined by refractometry and needs to be interpreted in the context of the hydration status of the patient. Chemical examination of the urine consists of the determination of the pH value and the presence of blood/hemoglobin/myoglobin, protein, glucose, bilirubin, urobilinogen, nitrite, and ketones. The use of commercially available urine dipsticks is common. These must be stored and used according to the manufacturer's instructions and when interpreting the results, veterinary aspects need to be taken into consideration. The physical and chemical examinations of the urine represent rapid and readily performable methods that provide important information for the diagnosis or the exclusion of numerous diseases.

Investigation of the effects of storage with preservatives at room temperature or refrigeration without preservatives on urinalysis results for samples from healthy dogs

OBJECTIVE

To compare urinalysis results for canine urine samples stored in preservative-containing tubes at room temperature (20°C to 25°C [68°F to 77°F]) or refrigerated at 4°C (39.2°F) in plain glass tubes with results for the same samples immediately after collection.

SAMPLES

Urine samples from 20 healthy dogs.

PROCEDURES

Urine samples (1/dog) were divided into 6 aliquots (3 in preservative-containing tubes and 3 in plain glass tubes). Preservative-containing tubes were stored at room temperature and plain glass tubes were refrigerated. Urinalysis was performed 0, 24, and 72 hours after collection. Results for both storage conditions were compared with results for a reference sample (the 0-hour [immediate post-collection] aliquot in a plain glass tube) by Spearman correlation analysis with pairwise tests for selected variables.

RESULTS

Physical variables (urine color and turbidity with and without centrifugation) for both storage conditions had high (r_s = 0.7 to 0.9) or very high (r_s = 0.9 to 1.0) degrees of positive correlation with reference sample results at all time points, except for color at 24 hours. Similar results were found for all biochemical variables with storage up to 72 hours. For microscopic characteristics, correlation with reference sample results ranged from low or nonsignificant to very high under both storage conditions.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Results suggested that if a delay in urinalysis is expected, use of the preservative-containing tubes evaluated in this study may be a viable option for sample storage. Further research is warranted to assess direct comparability of results to those of freshly collected samples and use of these tubes to store samples from dogs with conditions affecting the urinary tract.

Evaluation of a Home Urinalysis Kit in Dogs

Dry reagent strip evaluation of urine is a standard screening and diagnostic test used to assess overall health and help detect or rule out specific disease conditions. A commercial at-home urinalysis reagent strip kit using a smartphone app to evaluate free-catch urine is being marketed directly to dog and cat owners. We compared agreement between simultaneous urinalysis using the commercial kit and standard reference methods in 48 canine urines submitted to our referral laboratory. Agreement was defined by analyte based on clinical impact. Sensitivity, specificity, and Cohen's kappa evaluated categorical data, and a paired t test was used for continuous variables (significance P < .05). The commercial kit had ≥1 disagreement with the reference method per sample and produced results if the test strip was absent or reversed. Specific gravity and pH concurred with the reference method in only 31% (P < .011) and 27% (P < .001) of cases, respectively. The sensitivity was low for all analytes except ketones, which had 77% false positives. False-positive nitrites and leukocytes were also frequent (36 and 19%, respectively). False negatives for blood (27%), nitrites (38%), and protein (54%) were common. This kit is inaccurate; its use for clinical decisions is not recommended.