Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Veterinary Medicine and Science logoLink to Veterinary Medicine and Science
. 2025 Jul 30;11(5):e70532. doi: 10.1002/vms3.70532

Relationship between Urine Protein‐To‐Creatinine Ratio and Leukocyte Esterase in Canine Urine Samples

Chen‐Yin Liao 1, Tsun‐Li Cheng 2, Cheng‐Hung Lai 1,2,✉
PMCID: PMC12309404  PMID: 40736656

Abstract

Background

The urine dipstick strip test is used for detecting urinary leukocytes and protein; however, factors like specific gravity, pH and infection may affect accuracy. Concerns exist regarding white blood cells interfering with the urine protein‐to‐creatinine (UP/C) ratio, a key test for proteinuria.

Objectives

This study aimed to determine whether the results of the leukocyte esterase test affect the UP/C ratio in canine urine samples.

Methods

A total of 186 canine urine samples were collected. The dipstick strip leukocyte esterase test was used to classify the specimens into two groups: leukocyte strip‐positive (+) and leukocyte strip‐negative (−). The UP/C ratio was then measured for all samples employing the Catalyst One biochemical analyser.

Results

The absolute value of the correlation coefficient between leukocyte strip status (±) and the UP/C ratio was 0.014 (p = 0.849), indicating no significant correlation. When applying the International Renal Interest Society (IRIS) grading criteria and setting the threshold for abnormal UP/C at ≥ 0.2, no significant correlation was found between leukocyte strip status and abnormal UP/C (p = 0.490). When categorising the UP/C ratio according to IRIS classification criteria, the absolute value of the correlation coefficient between leukocyte strip status and UP/C classification was 0.032 (p = 0.661), again showing no association. These findings suggest that a positive leukocyte esterase test does not interfere with the UP/C ratio.

Conclusions

The presence of a positive leukocyte esterase test does not affect the UP/C ratio in canine urine samples. Therefore, the UP/C ratio test can be performed regardless of the results of the leukocyte esterase test.

Keywords: canine, leukocyte esterase, proteinuria, urinalysis, UP/C ratio, urine dipstick strip

The presence of a positive leukocyte esterase test does not affect the UP/C ratio in canine urine samples. The UP/C ratio test should be performed first for the quantitative detection of proteinuria, even when the urine dipstick strip test is positive for leukocyte esterase and protein.

graphic file with name VMS3-11-e70532-g002.jpg

1. Introduction

Proteinuria refers to the presence of protein in urine and can be classified into three types: Pre‐renal, renal and post‐renal proteinuria (Beetham and Cattell 1993; Harley and Langston 2012). The dipstick strip test is a commonly used method for detecting protein in urine during routine urinalysis. It is a colourimetric, semi‐quantitative test that is particularly sensitive to albumin (Defontis et al. 2013). However, the accuracy of the protein strip test can be influenced by various factors, such as urine specific gravity (SG), pH and urinary tract infection (UTI), which can reduce its sensitivity and specificity (Grauer 2007). The dipstick strip test for proteinuria is known to have a high false‐positive rate (Grauer et al. 2004; Zatelli et al. 2010). For instance, Lyon et al. (2010) reported that 52% of trace or positive results from the protein strip test were false positives. Moreover, the interaction between the protein test pad and white blood cells (WBCs) can lead to false positive results. Therefore, confirming proteinuria is essential when leukocytes and protein are detected on a dipstick strip test (Grauer 2005).

The urine protein‐to‐creatine (UP/C) ratio test is considered the most practical and accurate method for confirming proteinuria in canine urine (Parrah et al. 2013). Unlike the 24‐h urine protein excretion measurement, the UP/C ratio test requires only a small, randomly collected urine sample (Rossi et al. 2012). The UP/C ratio is not influenced by factors such as sex, urine collection method or time of collection; however, it strongly correlates with 24‐h urine protein excretion (Chew et al. 2010).

However, the UP/C ratio must be interpreted in conjunction with urine sediment analysis. According to Chew et al. (2010), the UP/C ratio should not be evaluated when there are more than three WBCs per high‐power field (WBCs/hpf) in concentrated urine, as even a small increase in WBCs can elevate the UP/C ratio. Therefore, veterinary practitioners are advised to exclude urine sediment—defined as red blood cells (RBCs) > 5/hpf, WBCs > 5/hpf or microscopic bacteriuria—and UTI before performing the UP/C ratio test (Grauer 2007). Accurate quantification of WBCs in urine sediment requires microscopic analysis by a specialist. This method differs from the dipstick strip leukocyte esterase test, which detects the concentration of leukocyte esterase rather than the actual WBC count (Defontis et al. 2013). However, as a specialist may not always be available in many veterinary practices, the dipstick strip test remains the most commonly used method for routine urinalysis.

In this study, canine urine samples were collected to measure the UP/C ratio and perform the leukocyte esterase test. This study aimed to assess the correlation between leukocyte esterase test results and the UP/C ratio.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Urine Sample Collection and Study Design

Urine samples (15ml) were collected from dogs referred to the Veterinary Medical Teaching Hospital, National Chung Hsing University, Taichung (Taiwan), regardless of age, sex, breed, underlying diseases, medication history and method of urine collection. Fresh urine specimens of sufficient quantity were used; in contrast, specimens with abnormal colour and turbidity were excluded.

2.2. Urinalysis

Routine urinalysis, dipstick strip testing and the UP/C ratio test were conducted on all urine specimens. The routine urine examination and dipstick strip test were performed within 30 min of specimen collection or 2 h if refrigerated at 2°C–4°C. Furthermore, 5 mL of each urine specimen was stored at −80°C for the UP/C ratio test.

Routine urinalysis included an assessment of urine colour, appearance and SG. Colour and appearance were visually assessed; in contrast, urine SG was measured using a digital handheld refractometer (OPTi, Bellingham & Stanley Ltd.). The dipstick strip test was performed using IDEXX UA Strips, with each strip briefly immersed in the urine specimen and then placed on the tray of the IDEXX VetLab UA autoanalyser (IDEXX Laboratories, Inc.) for interpretation. This study focused specifically on the leukocyte esterase test results, with concentrations of 0, 25, 100 and 500 leu/µL (as reported by the IDEXX VetLab UA) used to represent the leukocyte esterase concentration.

For the UP/C ratio test, urine specimens stored at −80°C were thawed and brought to a temperature of 22°C–28°C. After centrifugation at 450 g for 5 min, the supernatants were analysed using the Catalyst One biochemical analyser (IDEXX Laboratories, Inc.). The detection ranges for urine protein and creatinine were 5–400 mg/dl and 6–350 mg/dl, respectively. If the concentration of protein or creatinine exceeded the instrument's detection range, the specimen was diluted with distilled water before re‐testing in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions.

2.3. Statistical Analysis

All specimens were categorised into two groups: Leukocyte strip‐positive (+) (≥ 25 leu/µL) and leukocyte strip‐negative (−) (0 leu/µL). The Mann–Whitney U Test was employed to assess differences in the UP/C ratio between the two groups. Spearman's rank correlation was used to evaluate the relationship between the leukocyte strip (±) and the UP/C ratio. To assess differences in the UP/C ratio across varying leukocyte esterase concentrations, a Kruskal–Wallis test was performed on four defined groups (0, 25, 100 and 500 leu/µL). According to the IRIS classification criteria, a UP/C ratio of less than 0.2 was considered normal, a ratio between 0.2 and 0.5 was considered borderline, and a ratio greater than 0.5 was indicative of proteinuria. The Pearson chi‐squared test was used to assess the correlation between leukocyte strip status and the presence of an abnormal UP/C ratio. Spearman's rank correlation was also applied to evaluate the association between leukocyte strip status and classification. Statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS Statistics 20 software, with a p‐value of less than 0.05 considered statistically significant.

3. Results

A total of 186 canine urine specimens were collected, comprising 83 (45%) obtained via cystocentesis, three (2%) via catheterisation and 100 (53%) via free catch. The dogs’ ages ranged from 5 months to 18 years, with 69 females and 117 males. Of the 186 specimens, 48 (25.8%) were positive for leukocytes; in contrast, 138 (74.2%) were negative for leukocytes. Among the 48 leukocyte strip (+) specimens, 12 (25%) had a leukocyte esterase concentration of 25 leukocytes per microliter (leu/µL), nine (19%) had 100 leu/µL, and 27 (56%) had 500 leu/µL.

The mean UP/C ratio for all specimens was 1.00 ± 1.47 (mean ± SD). In the leukocyte strip (+) group, the mean UP/C ratio was 1.01 ± 1.65; in contrast, in the leukocyte strip (−) group, it was 1.00 ± 1.42. The median UP/C ratio was 0.38 in the leukocyte strip (+) group and 0.41 leukocyte strip (−) group, with no significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.682), as shown in Table 1 and Figure 1. The Kruskal–Wallis analysis yielded a p‐value of 0.542, indicating no significant differences in UP/C ratios among the groups (0, 25, 100 and 500 leu/µL), as shown in Figure 2.

TABLE 1.

Mean and median UP/C ratios in leukocyte strip (+) and leukocyte strip (‐) groups.

Average mean ± SD Median p value *
All 1.00 ± 1.47
Leukocyte strip (+) 1.00 ± 1.42 0.38 0.682
Leukocyte strip (−) 1.01 ± 1.65 0.41
Open in a new tab

Abbreviations: Leukocyte strip (+), leukocyte strip‐positive; leukocyte strip (−), leukocyte strip‐negative; UP/C, urine protein‐to‐creatinine ratio.

*Mann–Whitney U test.

FIGURE 1.

FIGURE 1

Open in a new tab

Median UP/C ratio for the leukocyte strip (+) and leukocyte strip (−) groups. Leukocyte strip (+), leukocyte strip‐positive; leukocyte strip (−), leukocyte strip‐negative; UP/C, urine protein‐to‐creatinine ratio.

FIGURE 2.

FIGURE 2

Open in a new tab

Median UP/C ratio of different leukocyte esterase concentration groups (0, 25, 100 and 500 leu/µL). UP/C ratio, urine protein‐to‐creatinine ratio.

When using 0 leu/µL as the threshold for leukocyte strip (−), the absolute value of the correlation coefficient between leukocyte strip status and the UP/C ratio (Spearman's rank correlation) was 0.014 (p = 0.849), indicating no significant correlation. Further analysis using 25 and 100 leu/µL as the thresholds for leukocyte strip (−) yielded correlation coefficients of 0.019 (p = 0.798) and 0.052 (p = 0.479), respectively, again confirming no statistically significant correlation.

Based on the IRIS grading criteria, where UP/C ≥ 0.2 is considered abnormal, the distribution of leukocyte strip status was as follows:

  • A total of 143 specimens had a UP/C ratio of ≥ 0.2, of which 35 (24.5%) were positive for leukocyte strips and 108 (75.5%) were negative for leukocyte strips.

  • A total of 43 had UP/C < 0.2, with 13 (30.2%) leukocyte strip (+) and 30 (69.8%) leukocyte strip (−).

No significant correlation was observed between leukocyte strip status and abnormal UP/C (p = 0.490), as shown in Table 2.

TABLE 2.

Distribution of leukocyte strip (+) and leukocyte strip (−) results in normal and abnormal UP/C categories.

Variable

UP/C ≥ 0.2

Abnormal UP/C

UP/C ≥ 0.2

Normal UP/C

UP/C < 0.2

 p value
(n = 143) (n = 43)
Leukocyte strip (+) 35 (24.5%) 13 (30.2%) 0.490
Leukocyte strip (−) 108 (75.5%) 30 (69.8%)

Variable

UP/C ≥ 0.5

Abnormal UP/C

UP/C ≥ 0.5

Normal UP/C

UP/C < 0.5

 p value
(n = 83) (n = 103)
Leukocyte strip (+) 20 (24.1%) 28 (27.2%) 0.632
Leukocyte strip (‐) 63 (75.9%) 75 (72.8%)
Open in a new tab

Abbreviations: Leukocyte strip (+), leukocyte strip‐positive; leukocyte strip (−), leukocyte strip‐negative; UP/C, urine protein‐to‐creatinine ratio.

When the cut‐off for abnormal UP/C was adjusted to UP/C ≥ 0.5, the distribution was as follows:

  • Among 83 specimens with a UP/C ratio of ≥ 0.5, 20 (24.1%) were positive for leukocyte strips, and 63 (75.9%) were negative for leukocyte strips.

  • Among 103 specimens with a UP/C ratio of < 0.5, 28 (27.2%) were positive for leukocyte strips, and 75 (72.8%) were negative for leukocyte strips.

Again, no significant correlation was found between leukocyte strip status and abnormal UP/C (p = 0.632), as shown in Table 2.

In addition, when the UP/C ratio was classified based on the IRIS criteria, the absolute value of the correlation coefficient between leukocyte strip status and UP/C classification was 0.032 (p = 0.661), further confirming the lack of a significant correlation.

4. Discussion

This study shows that there is no correlation between leukocyte esterase strip test results and the UP/C ratio. Grauer (2007) noted that when leukocyte and protein strips yield positive results in a urine dipstick strip test, veterinary practitioners often initiate antibiotic treatment and postpone quantitative proteinuria testing until the leukocyte esterase test result becomes negative. This practice is based on the assumption that a protein strip (+) result is indicative of UTI and that WBCs may influence the UP/C ratio. However, this approach is inappropriate. The correct sequence of assessment should begin with confirming proteinuria, followed by determining its origin.

The findings of this study suggest that the UP/C ratio test can be performed even when leukocyte esterase and protein strip tests yield positive results. This is because the presence of a positive leukocyte strip result does not affect the UP/C ratio.

The results align with previous research. Bagley et al. (1991) reported that a UP/C ratio ≥ 0.5 was observed in 42% of leukocyte strip (+) specimens and 45% of leukocyte strip (−) specimens, with no significant difference between the groups. Similarly, Rossi et al. (2012) found that the presence of active urine sediment did not significantly influence the UP/C ratio, as mean UP/C values were nearly identical between positive and negative sediment samples. In addition, a study in human medicine examining 3645 urine specimens from patients with leukocyte strip (+) but no urinary tract symptoms found that the leukocyte strip status did not affect the accuracy of quantitative proteinuria testing (Clausen et al. 1998).

Siska et al. (2017) reported that dogs with chronic kidney disease (CKD) in IRIS Stage 1 have a high incidence of positive urine culture (PUC). Their findings suggest a high likelihood of concurrent positive leukocyte and protein strip test results in patients with early‐stage CKD. In such cases, attributing a positive protein strip result to UTI without further investigation may lead to diagnostic errors. Based on the present study, the recommended protocol is to first perform a UP/C test to confirm proteinuria, followed by identifying its origin to ensure CKD is not overlooked.

Proteinuria is a significant clinical marker in critically ill dogs, as it is attributed to survival outcomes (Whittemore et al. 2011). Nephrogenic and non‐nephrogenic proteinuria can contribute to kidney damage (Lyon et al. 2010), and reducing proteinuria has been shown to protect renal function (Vaden and Elliott 2016). Reddy et al. (2021) estimated that the overall incidence of CKD is approximately 40%, underscoring the importance of early detection of proteinuria. Given the critical role of proteinuria in assessing renal health, quantitative proteinuria testing should be a routine component of canine urinalysis (Lees et al. 2005; Levin et al. 2008). The UP/C ratio test can detect CKD before azotaemia develops (Smets et al. 2010) and is a valuable tool for detecting early kidney damage (Sant'Anna et al. 2019). The findings of the present study may help improve early detection of proteinuria (nephrogenic and non‐nephrogenic proteinuria).

It is essential to distinguish between the dipstick strip leukocyte esterase test and urine sediment analysis, as their methodologies differ significantly. Although trained professionals should conduct urine sediment analysis and urine culture, dipstick strip tests remain the most commonly used, accessible and cost‐effective method for routine urinalysis in veterinary clinics. Lamoureux et al. (2019) reported that the leukocyte esterase test has a very high specificity. The American Society for Veterinary Clinical Pathology guidelines also highlight the high specificity of positive leukocyte pad results in canine urine dipstick strip tests (Arnold et al. 2019). Reine and Langston (2005) found that positive leukocyte esterase results on dipstick strip tests strongly correlate with active urine sediment and PUC, indicating pyuria. The results of previous investigations suggest that leukocyte strip (+) results correlate with active urine sediment and PUC. However, this study showed that UP/C ratio was not affected by leucocyte esterase. Further research is warranted to explore the relationship between WBCs and UP/C ratio results.

Regarding the effect of blood on canine urine samples, Vaden et al. (2004) reported that even when urine samples exhibited significant colour changes, the UP/C ratio did not exceed normal values. Chew et al. (2010) noted that the UP/C ratio should not be used to assess proteinuria if the urine sample appears pink or red. However, Jillings et al. (2019) suggested that if the urine remains yellow, it is inappropriate to attribute proteinuria solely to haematuria. To minimise potential interference, this study excluded urine samples with abnormal colouration.

A limitation of this study is the absence of a comparative analysis of urine sediment findings among the collected specimens. Future studies incorporating additional data, such as urine sediment analysis, urine culture results and patient medical histories, could provide a more comprehensive understanding of the factors influencing the UP/C ratio.

5. Conclusion

The UP/C ratio test should be performed first for the quantitative detection of proteinuria, even when the urine dipstick strip test is positive for leukocyte esterase and protein. Subsequent tests, such as urine sediment analysis and urine culture, should then be conducted to determine the underlying cause of proteinuria. This diagnostic approach enhances clinical decision‐making and improves the early detection of proteinuria.

Author Contributions

Chen‐Yin Liao: resources, methodology, investigation, data curation, formal analysis and writing – original draft. Tsun‐Li Cheng: resources, methodology and investigation. Cheng‐Hung Lai: conceptualization, validation, project administration, supervision and writing – review and editing

Ethics Statement

The animal experimental protocol was approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee of of National Chung Hsing University and numbered 113‐047.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Peer Review

The peer review history for this article is available at https://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway/wos/peer‐review/10.1002/vms3.70532.

Acknowledgements

We sincerely thank all the members of the Division of Laboratory Examination in Veterinary Teaching Hospital, National Chung Hsing University, for generously sharing their experiences.

Funding: The authors did not receive any specific fund for this work.

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

References

  1. Arnold, J. E. , Camus M. S., Freeman K. P., et al. 2019. “ASVCP Guidelines: Principles of Quality Assurance and Standards for Veterinary Clinical Pathology (Version 3.0): Developed by the American Society for Veterinary Clinical Pathology's (ASVCP) Quality Assurance and Laboratory Standards (QALS) Committee.” Veterinary Clinical Pathology 48, no. 4: 542–618. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Bagley, R. S. , Center S. A., Lewis R. M., et al. 1991. “The Effect of Experimental Cystitis and Iatrogenic Blood Contamination on the Urine Protein/Creatine Ratio in the Dog.” Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine 5, no. 2: 66–70. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Beetham, R. , and Cattell W. R.. 1993. “Proteinuria: Pathophysiology, Significance and Recommendations for Measurement in Clinical Practice.” Annals of Clinical Biochemistry 30, no. 5: 425–434. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Chew, D. J. , DiBartola S. P., and Schenck P. A.. 2010. Canine and Feline Nephrology and Urology. 2nd ed. Elsevier. [Google Scholar]
  5. Clausen, P. , Jensen J. S., Borch‐Johnsen K., Jensen G., and Feldt‐Rasmussen B.. 1998. “Prevalence of Positive Urinary Dipstick Analysis (Leucocyte Esterase, Nitrite, Haemoglobin, or Glucose) in a Population of 3645 Adult Subjects–Consequence for Measurement of Urinary Albumin Excretion Rate.” Scandinavian Journal of Urology and Nephrology 32, no. 6: 399–404. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Defontis, M. , Bauer N., Failing K., and Moritz A.. 2013. “Automated and Visual Analysis of Commercial Urinary Dipsticks in Dogs, Cats and Cattle.” Research in Veterinary Science 94, no. 3: 440–445. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Grauer, G. F. 2005. “Early Detection of Renal Damage and Disease in Dogs and Cats.” Veterinary Clinics of North America: Small Animal Practice 35, no. 3: 581–596. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Grauer, G. F. 2007. “Measurement, Interpretation, and Implications of Proteinuria and Albuminuria.” Veterinary Clinics of North America: Small Animal Practice 37, no. 2: 283–295. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Grauer, G. F. , Moore L. E., Smith A. R., and Jensen W. A.. 2004. “Comparison of Conventional Urine Protein Test Strips and a Quantitative ELISA for the Detection of Canine and Feline Albuminuria.” Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine 18, no. 3: 418–419. [Google Scholar]
  10. Harley, L. , and Langston C.. 2012. “Proteinuria in Dogs and Cats.” Canadian Veterinary Journal 53, no. 6: 631–638. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Jillings, E. , Squires R. A., Azarpeykan S., and Lopez‐Villalobos N.. 2019. “Does Blood Contamination of Urine Compromise Interpretation of the Urine Protein to Creatinine Ratio in Dogs.” New Zealand Veterinary Journal 67, no. 2: 74–78. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Lamoureux, A. , Da Riz F., Cappelle J., et al. 2019. “Frequency of Bacteriuria in Dogs With Chronic Kidney Disease: A Retrospective Study of 201 Cases.” Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine 33, no. 2: 640–647. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Lees, G. E. , Brown S. A., Elliott J., Grauer G. E., and Vaden S. L.. 2005. “Assessment and Management of Proteinuria in Dogs and Cats: 2004 ACVIM Forum Consensus Statement (Small Animal).” Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine 19, no. 3: 377–385. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Levin, A. , Hemmelgarn B., Culleton B., et al. 2008. “Guidelines for the Management of Chronic Kidney Disease.” Canadian Medical Association Journal 179, no. 11: 1154–1162. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Lyon, S. D. , Sanderson M. W., Vaden S. L., Lappin M. R., Jensen W. A., and Grauer G. F.. 2010. “Comparison of Urine Dipstick, Sulfosalicylic Acid, Urine Protein‐to‐Creatinine Ratio, and Species‐Specific ELISA Methods for Detection of Albumin in Urine Samples of Cats and Dogs.” Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 236, no. 8: 874–879. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Parrah, J. D. , Moulvi B. A., and Gazi M. A., et al. 2013. “Importance of Urinalysis in Veterinary Practice: A Review.” Veterinary World 6, no. 9: 640–646. [Google Scholar]
  17. Reddy, A. , Lakshmi K., Ambica G., and Kumar B. A.. 2021. “Incidence of Chronic Kidney Disease in Dogs.” Pharma Innovation Journal 10, no. 7: 738–740. [Google Scholar]
  18. Reine, N. J. , and Langston C. E.. 2005. “Urinalysis Interpretation: How to Squeeze out the Maximum Information From a Small Sample.” Clinical Techniques in Small Animal Practice 20, no. 1: 2–10. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Rossi, G. , Giori L., Campagnola S., Zatelli A., Zini E., and Paltrinieri S.. 2012. “Evaluation of Factors That Affect Analytic Variability of Urine Protein‐to‐Creatinine Ratio Determination in Dogs.” American Journal of Veterinary Research 73, no. 6: 779–788. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Sant'Anna, M. C. , Martins G. F., Flaiban K., Trautwein L. G. C., and Martins M. I. M.. 2019. “Protein‐to‐Creatinine Urinary in the Early Diagnosis of Renal Injury in Canine Pyometra.” Pesquisa Veterinaria Brasileira 39, no. 3: 186–191. 10.1590/1678-5150-pvb-5624. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  21. Siska, W. D. , Meyer D. J., Schultze A. E., and Brandoff C.. 2017. “Identification of Contaminant Interferences Which Cause Positive Urine Reagent Test Strip Reactions in a Cage Setting for the Laboratory‐Housed Nonhuman Primate, Beagle Dog, and Sprague‐Dawley Rat.” Veterinary Clinical Pathology 46, no. 1: 85–90. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Smets, P. M. Y. , Meyer E., Maddens B. E., Duchateau L., and Daminet S.. 2010. “Urinary Markers in Healthy Young and Aged Dogs and Dogs With Chronic Kidney Disease.” Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine 24, no. 1: 65–72. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Vaden, S. L. , and Elliott J.. 2016. “Management of Proteinuria in Dogs and Cats With Chronic Kidney Disease.” Veterinary Clinics of North America: Small Animal Practice 46, no. 6: 1115–1130. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Vaden, S. L. , Pressler B. M., Lappin M. R., and Jensen W. A.. 2004. “Effects of Urinary Tract Inflammation and Sample Blood Contamination on Urine Albumin and Total Protein Concentrations in Canine Urine Samples.” Veterinary Clinical Pathology 33, no. 1: 14–19. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Whittemore, J. C. , Marcum B. A., Mawby D. I., Coleman M. V., Hacket T. B., and Lappin M. R.. 2011. “Associations Among Albuminuria, C‐Reactive Protein Concentrations, Survival Predictor Index Scores, and Survival in 78 Critically Ill Dogs.” Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine 25, no. 4: 818–824. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Zatelli, A. , Paltrinieri S., Nizi F., Roura X., and Zini E.. 2010. “Evaluation of a Urine Dipstick Test for Confirmation or Exclusion of Proteinuria in Dogs.” American Journal of Veterinary Research 71, no. 2: 235–240. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Articles from Veterinary Medicine and Science are provided here courtesy of Wiley

RESOURCES