Review on adherence of the literature to official recommendations on albuminuria harmonization and standardization

Clin Chem Lab Med. 2023 Jun 19;61(12):2076-2083. doi: 10.1515/cclm-2023-0408. Print 2023 Nov 27.

Abstract

Albuminuria standardization is a key issue to produce reliable and equivalent results between laboratories. We investigated whether official recommendations on albuminuria harmonization are followed in the literature. The PubMed database was searched from June 1 to September 26, 2021. The search terms included urine albumin, urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio (uACR), and albuminuria. A total of 159 articles were considered eligible; 50.9 % reported the type of urine collection. Specifically, 58.1 % collected a random spot urine specimen, 21 % collected a first morning void, and 6.2 % collected a 24-h specimen. Overall, 15 % of articles reported data on sample shipping, storage, and centrifugation and 13.3 % mentioned the preanalytical phase without any data on albuminuria. The method for albuminuria was properly described in 31.4 % of articles; of these, 54.9 % used immunological methods, and 8.9 % contained errors or missing data. Most articles (76.7 %) expressed test results as albuminuria-to-creatininuria ratio. Different decision levels were utilized in 130 articles; of these, 36 % used a decision level of ≤30 mg/g creatininuria and 23.7 % used three decision levels (≤30, 30-300, and ≥300 mg/g). The failure to follow guidelines on albuminuria harmonization was mainly found in the preanalytical phase. The poor awareness of the importance of preanalytical steps on test result may be a possible explanation.

Keywords: albuminuria; analytical methods; creatininuria; harmonization; pre-analytical phase; standardization.

Publication types

  • Review

MeSH terms

  • Albumins
  • Albuminuria* / diagnosis
  • Albuminuria* / urine
  • Creatinine / urine
  • Humans
  • Laboratories
  • Urinalysis* / methods
  • Urine Specimen Collection

Substances

  • Albumins
  • Creatinine