1 / 39

Evaluation of Proteinuria in the Pediatric Patient

Evaluation of Proteinuria in the Pediatric Patient. Alicia M. Neu, M.D. Division of Pediatric Nephrology. Definition of Abnormal Proteinuria. Adults: >150 mg/24 hours Children: >4 mg/m 2 /hour. Sources of “Normal” Proteinuria. Plasma proteins filtered at the glomerulus

vondra
Download Presentation

Evaluation of Proteinuria in the Pediatric Patient

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Evaluation of Proteinuria in the Pediatric Patient Alicia M. Neu, M.D. Division of Pediatric Nephrology

  2. Definition of Abnormal Proteinuria • Adults: >150 mg/24 hours • Children: >4 mg/m2/hour

  3. Sources of “Normal” Proteinuria • Plasma proteins filtered at the glomerulus • Proteins excreted by renal tubular cells • Proteins secreted by the lining of the bladder and urethra

  4. Mechanisms of Abnormal Proteinuria • Overflow proteinuria • Increased glomerular permeability • Tubular proteinuria • Tissue proteinuria • Altered renal hemodynamics

  5. Evaluation of Proteinuria • Qualitative testing- the urine dipstick • measures primarily albumin • false positives with alkaline pH • results affected by concentration of urine

  6. Evaluation of Proteinuria • Timed urine collection for total protein and creatinine • normal < 4 mg/m2/hour • significant 4-40 mg/m2/hour • nephrotic range > 40 mg/m2/hour

  7. Evaluation of Proteinuria Nephrotic range proteinuria may occur with or without the nephrotic syndrome, but almost always signifies glomerular disease.

  8. Evaluation of Proteinuria • Fractionated urine collection 3 separate collections: 8 am-4 pm 4 pm-12 midnight 12 midnight-8 am Separate measurement of urinary total protein and creatinine on each collection Look for increasing proteinuria during the day, but normal overnight

  9. Evaluation of Proteinuria • Random urine protein/creatinine : Age Uprotein/Ucreatinine NORMAL NEPHROTIC <2 y <.492 >1.5 2-13 y <.178 >1.5 >13 y <.178 >1.5

  10. Evaluation of Proteinuria • Urinary microalbumin Typical quantitative tests measure total protein and have lower limit of detection of 5 mg/dl “Urinary microalbumin” tests measure only albumin and lower limit of detection is 3 mg/L (.3 mg/dl) Normal for children 27 mcg/mg creatinine

  11. Evaluation of Proteinuria • Microscopic urinalysis: rbc, wbc, casts • H&P: attention to clues for underlying systemic disease, chronic renal disease, risk factors for HIV, Hepatitis • Other labs: CBC, CMP, PO4, C3, C4, ANA, HIV, Hepatitis B, C • Consider renal ultrasound

  12. Indications for Referral • Abnormal renal function • Abnormal serologies • Significant proteinuria that does not “fractionate” • + Nephrotic syndrome, especially atypical

  13. Indications for Renal Biopsy • Significant or nephrotic range proteinuria without the nephrotic syndrome (in adolescent patient confirm that urine does not “fractionate”)

  14. Indications for Renal Biopsy • Nephrotic range proteinuria with the nephrotic syndrome and any of the following: • gross hematuria • age < 2y, > 12 y • abnormal renal function, serologies

  15. CASE PRESENTATIONS

  16. Case I MN is a 14 yo BM noted on a sports PE to have 4+ proteinuria. PMH neg, ROS neg. Plays lacrosse and soccer.

  17. Case I PE WT 55 kg; SA 1.1m2 BP 118/70. PE wnl U/A: S.G 1.015, pH 5.5, 4+ protein, - heme, - glucose Microanalysis- neg

  18. What would you do next ? • Monitor without further w/u or therapy ? • Perform “screening” laboratory studies ? • Treat empirically with steroids ?

  19. Case I 24 hour urine: 481 mg protein (18 mg/m2/h) Na 136, K 3.9, Cl 108, HCO3 24, BUN 19, Cr 0.7, TP 7.0, Alb 3.9, Chol 112 C3 99, C4 18, ANA neg HIV neg Hep B neg Renal ultrasound normal

  20. What would you do next ? • Monitor without further w/u or therapy ? • Perform further laboratory studies ? • Treat empirically with steroids ?

  21. Case I • Fractionated Urine: 8am- 4pm: 16 mg/m2/h 4pm-12am: 22 mg/m2/h 12am-8am: 3 mg/m2/h

  22. Orthostatic Proteinuria • Accounts for 60% of all children with proteinuria, probably higher in adolescents* • Usually < 1 g proteinuria/day, nephrotic range extremely unusual • Best diagnosed with a fractionated 24 hour urine (vs 1st am void) • Should document normal renal function, BP * J Pediatric, 1976

  23. Case II DJ is a 12 yo AA F who presents to your clinic with a 3 d hx of periorbital edema, and lower extremity edema. His PMH is notable only for a URI 2-3 weeks prior to the onset of swelling.

  24. Case II PE: Wt 35 kg SA 1.0 m2 BP 121/82 P 90 RR 18 + periorbital edema, mild abdominal fullness, labial edema, LE edema U/A: SG 1.020, pH 6.0, 3+ protein, - heme, - glucose Microanalysis- neg

  25. What would you do next ? • Monitor without further w/u or therapy ? • Perform “screening” laboratory studies ? • Treat empirically with steroids ?

  26. Case II 24 hour urine: 1300 mg protein 77 mg/m2/h Na 131; Cl 103; K 4.1; BUN 10; Cr 0.6 TP 4.0; Alb 1.5; Chol 375 C3 103; C4 24; ANA neg Hep B S Ag neg, Hep C Ab neg, HIV neg Renal ultrasound normal CXR normal

  27. What would you do next ? • Monitor without further w/u or therapy ? • Perform further laboratory studies ? • Treat empirically with steroids ?

  28. Case II • Treated with 2 mg/kg/day oral steroids • Within 2 weeks, urine protein negative, edema gone • Successfully tapered off of steroids (after 6 weeks of daily and 6 weeks of qod). Has relapse 2-3 times/year • Presumptive Dx: INS

  29. Idiopathic Nephrotic Syndrome • Children 2-6 years, normal renal function, neg serologies • May have a number of underlying pathologic lesions • Response to steroids best predictor of underlying pathology and prognosis • 93 % will respond to steroids. 7% of initial non-responders will eventually respond • Biopsy: non-responder, steroid-dependent, frequent relapser

  30. Case III • KG is an 15 yo previously healthy WM who presents with 3 day history of low grade fever, malaise, myalgias, abdominal discomfort and diarrhea.

  31. Case III • PE- Wt 65 kg, SA 1.1 m2, BP 119/62 Afebrile He is tired appearing, but otherwise in NAD. PE notable only for mild dehydration and mild, diffuse abdominal tenderness without guarding or rebound. UA: SG 1.010, pH 6.0, 4+ protein, small hgb, - glucose, trace ketones Microanalysis-hyaline casts

  32. What would you do next ? • Monitor without further w/u or therapy ? • Perform “screening” laboratory studies ? • Treat empirically with steroids ?

  33. Case III • Diagnosed with viral syndrome, advised to force po fluids and return for follow up in several days. • On f/u- PE wnl, symptoms resolved. • Repeat UA S.G. 1.010, 3+ protein, sm hgb • Follow up UA 2 weeks later- unchanged

  34. What would you do next ? • Monitor without further w/u or therapy ? • Perform “screening” laboratory studies ? • Treat empirically with steroids ?

  35. Case III 24 hour urine: 900 mg protein 47 mg/m2/h Na 138; Cl 103; K 4.1; BUN 80; Cr 2.6 TP 7.0; Alb 4.0, Calcium 8.0, Phosphate 5.5 WBC 12,200, Hgb 8.0, Plt 325,000 C3 103; C4 24; ANA neg Hep B, C neg HIV neg

  36. What would you do next ? • Monitor without further w/u or therapy ? • Perform further laboratory studies ? • Treat empirically with steroids ?

  37. Case III • Renal ultrasound- small kidneys bilaterally with hydronephrosis • VCUG- bilateral grade V reflux

  38. Reflux Nephropathy • Together with obstructive uropathy is leading cause of end-stage renal disease in childhood • Typically presents with febrile urinary tract infection, may be diagnosed in utero • Although UTI felt to contribute to renal injury, there is not a direct correlation between UTI and progression • Genetic factors also involved

More Related