Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2013 Nov;8(11):1857-62.
doi: 10.2215/CJN.01330213. Epub 2013 Sep 19.

Utility of urine eosinophils in the diagnosis of acute interstitial nephritis

Affiliations

Utility of urine eosinophils in the diagnosis of acute interstitial nephritis

Angela K Muriithi et al. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2013 Nov.

Erratum in

  • Correction.
    [No authors listed] [No authors listed] Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2018 Jul 6;13(7):1079. doi: 10.2215/CJN.05270418. Epub 2018 May 30. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2018. PMID: 29848506 Free PMC article. No abstract available.

Abstract

Background and objectives: Urine eosinophils (UEs) have been shown to correlate with acute interstitial nephritis (AIN) but the four largest series that investigated the test characteristics did not use kidney biopsy as the gold standard.

Design, setting, participants, & measurements: This is a retrospective study of adult patients with biopsy-proven diagnoses and UE tests performed from 1994 to 2011. UEs were tested using Hansel's stain. Both 1% and 5% UE cutoffs were compared.

Results: This study identified 566 patients with both a UE test and a native kidney biopsy performed within a week of each other. Of these patients, 322 were men and the mean age was 59 years. There were 467 patients with pyuria, defined as at least one white cell per high-power field. There were 91 patients with AIN (80% was drug induced). A variety of kidney diseases had UEs. Using a 1% UE cutoff, the comparison of all patients with AIN to those with all other diagnoses showed 30.8% sensitivity and 68.2% specificity, giving positive and negative likelihood ratios of 0.97 and 1.01, respectively. Given this study's 16% prevalence of AIN, the positive and negative predictive values were 15.6% and 83.7%, respectively. At the 5% UE cutoff, sensitivity declined, but specificity improved. The presence of pyuria improved the sensitivity somewhat, with a decrease in specificity. UEs were no better at distinguishing AIN from acute tubular necrosis compared with other kidney diseases.

Conclusions: UEs were found in a variety of kidney diseases besides AIN. At the commonly used 1% UE cutoff, the test does not shift pretest probability of AIN in any direction. Even at a 5% cutoff, UEs performed poorly in distinguishing AIN from acute tubular necrosis or other kidney diseases.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
STARD diagram of patients with urine eosinophils and kidney biopsy. STARD, Standards for the Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy; AIN, acute interstitial nephritis.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Presence of eosinophiluria in various kidney biopsy diagnoses. Number of patients with UE results <1%, 1%–5%, or >5% by biopsy diagnoses. Noninflammatory glomerular disease included minimal change disease, membranous nephropathy, and FSGS. AIN, acute interstitial nephritis; ATN, acute tubular necrosis; TMA, thrombotic microangiopathy; MIDD, monoclonal Ig deposition disease.

Comment in

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Farrington K, Levison DA, Greenwood RN, Cattell WR, Baker LR: Renal biopsy in patients with unexplained renal impairment and normal kidney size. Q J Med 70: 221–233, 1989 - PubMed
    1. Michel DM, Kelly CJ: Acute interstitial nephritis. J Am Soc Nephrol 9: 506–515, 1998 - PubMed
    1. Neilson EG: Pathogenesis and therapy of interstitial nephritis. Kidney Int 35: 1257–1270, 1989 - PubMed
    1. Corwin HL, Korbet SM, Schwartz MM: Clinical correlates of eosinophiluria. Arch Intern Med 145: 1097–1099, 1985 - PubMed
    1. Nolan CR, 3rd, Anger MS, Kelleher SP: Eosinophiluria—a new method of detection and definition of the clinical spectrum. N Engl J Med 315: 1516–1519, 1986 - PubMed

Publication types