Urine Protein/Creatinine Ratio in Thrombotic Microangiopathies: A Simple Test to Facilitate Thrombotic Thrombocytopenic Purpura and Hemolytic and Uremic Syndrome Diagnosis.
diagnosis
differential
hemolytic-uremic syndrome
proteinuria
purpura
thrombotic microangiopathies
thrombotic thrombocytopenic
Journal
Journal of clinical medicine
ISSN: 2077-0383
Titre abrégé: J Clin Med
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101606588
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
27 Jan 2022
27 Jan 2022
Historique:
received:
06
12
2021
revised:
14
01
2022
accepted:
24
01
2022
entrez:
15
2
2022
pubmed:
16
2
2022
medline:
16
2
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Early diagnosis of thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (TTP) versus hemolytic and uremic syndrome (HUS) is critical for the prompt initiation of specific therapies. To evaluate the diagnostic performance of the proteinuria/creatininuria ratio (PU/CU) for TTP versus HUS. In a retrospective study, in association with the "French Score" (FS) (platelets < 30 G/L and serum creatinine level < 200 µmol/L), we assessed PU/CU for the diagnosis of TTP in patients above the age of 15 with thrombotic microangiopathy (TMA). Patients with a history of kidney disease or with on-going cancer, allograft or pregnancy were excluded from the analysis. Between February 2011 and April 2019, we identified 124 TMA. Fifty-six TMA patients for whom PU/CU were available, including 35 TTP and 21 HUS cases, were considered. Using receiver-operating characteristic curves (ROC), those with a threshold of 1.5 g/g for the PU/CU had a 77% sensitivity (95% CI (63, 94)) and a 90% specificity (95% CI (71, 100)) for TTP diagnosis compared with those having an 80% sensitivity (95% CI (66, 92)) and a 90% specificity (95% CI (76, 100) with a FS of 2. In comparison, a composite score, defined as a FS of 2 or a PU/CU ≤ 1.5 g/g, improved sensitivity to 99.6% (95% CI (93, 100)) for TTP diagnosis and enabled us to reclassify seven false-negative TTP patients. The addition of urinary PU/CU upon admission of patients with TMA is a fast and readily available test that can aid in the differential diagnosis of TTP versus HUS alongside traditional scoring.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Early diagnosis of thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (TTP) versus hemolytic and uremic syndrome (HUS) is critical for the prompt initiation of specific therapies.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the diagnostic performance of the proteinuria/creatininuria ratio (PU/CU) for TTP versus HUS.
PATIENTS/METHODS
METHODS
In a retrospective study, in association with the "French Score" (FS) (platelets < 30 G/L and serum creatinine level < 200 µmol/L), we assessed PU/CU for the diagnosis of TTP in patients above the age of 15 with thrombotic microangiopathy (TMA). Patients with a history of kidney disease or with on-going cancer, allograft or pregnancy were excluded from the analysis.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Between February 2011 and April 2019, we identified 124 TMA. Fifty-six TMA patients for whom PU/CU were available, including 35 TTP and 21 HUS cases, were considered. Using receiver-operating characteristic curves (ROC), those with a threshold of 1.5 g/g for the PU/CU had a 77% sensitivity (95% CI (63, 94)) and a 90% specificity (95% CI (71, 100)) for TTP diagnosis compared with those having an 80% sensitivity (95% CI (66, 92)) and a 90% specificity (95% CI (76, 100) with a FS of 2. In comparison, a composite score, defined as a FS of 2 or a PU/CU ≤ 1.5 g/g, improved sensitivity to 99.6% (95% CI (93, 100)) for TTP diagnosis and enabled us to reclassify seven false-negative TTP patients.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The addition of urinary PU/CU upon admission of patients with TMA is a fast and readily available test that can aid in the differential diagnosis of TTP versus HUS alongside traditional scoring.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35160098
pii: jcm11030648
doi: 10.3390/jcm11030648
pmc: PMC8836555
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Références
Br J Haematol. 2007 Sep;138(5):651-62
pubmed: 17627784
N Engl J Med. 2019 Jan 24;380(4):335-346
pubmed: 30625070
Lancet. 2017 Aug 12;390(10095):681-696
pubmed: 28242109
Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2017 Apr 06;3:17020
pubmed: 28382967
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2011 Feb;26(2):742-4
pubmed: 20947535
Lancet Haematol. 2017 Apr;4(4):e157-e164
pubmed: 28259520
J Clin Epidemiol. 2001 Aug;54(8):774-81
pubmed: 11470385
Am J Kidney Dis. 2016 Jul;68(1):84-93
pubmed: 27012908
J Thromb Haemost. 2017 Feb;15(2):312-322
pubmed: 27868334
Am J Kidney Dis. 2015 Aug;66(2):359-75
pubmed: 26032627
Crit Care Med. 2012 Jan;40(1):104-11
pubmed: 21926591
Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2011 Mar;12(2):e90-3
pubmed: 20625343
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2020 Dec 4;35(12):2147-2153
pubmed: 31411695
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2019 Apr 5;14(4):557-566
pubmed: 30862697
Springer Semin Immunopathol. 2005 Nov;27(3):359-74
pubmed: 16189652
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2017 Jan 6;12(1):50-59
pubmed: 27799617
Blood. 2003 Jul 1;102(1):60-8
pubmed: 12637323
Blood. 2021 Feb 11;137(6):733-742
pubmed: 33150928
Stat Med. 1996 Feb 28;15(4):361-87
pubmed: 8668867
PLoS One. 2010 Apr 23;5(4):e10208
pubmed: 20436664
Res Pract Thromb Haemost. 2018 Nov 16;3(1):26-37
pubmed: 30656273
Thromb Res. 2020 Dec;196:335-339
pubmed: 32977133
J Clin Med. 2021 Jul 08;10(14):
pubmed: 34300201
Ann Intern Med. 2014 Jan 21;160(2):122-31
pubmed: 24592497