IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0324251.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Saliva urea nitrogen for detection of kidney disease in adults: A meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy

Author

Listed:
  • Reyna Kumaran
  • Mona Mohamed Ibrahim Abdalla
  • Brinnell Annette Caszo
  • Sushela Devi Somanath

Abstract

Background: Kidney disease affects millions globally, especially in low and middle-income countries where access to diagnostic testing is limited. Saliva urea nitrogen (SUN) has been proposed as a simple, non-invasive alternative to traditional serum-based diagnostics. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of SUN for detecting kidney disease in adults through a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: This review adhered to the PRISMA-DTA guidelines. A comprehensive search of five databases was conducted without language or date restrictions. Study quality was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool. STATA version 17 was used for analysis. A random-effects model was used to estimate pooled sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratios (DOR). Subgroup analysis was conducted based on the reference test used (serum creatinine or blood urea nitrogen). Heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistic, and meta-regression explored sources of heterogeneity. Results: Seven studies (n = 1,933) met the inclusion criteria. In the serum creatinine (sCr) subgroup (2 studies), SUN showed pooled sensitivity of 0.44 (95% CI: 0.38–0.49), specificity 0.96 (95% CI: 0.95–0.98), DOR 18.89 (95% CI: 15.19–23.57), and AUC ~ 0.90. In the blood urea nitrogen (BUN) subgroup (5 studies), sensitivity was 0.83 (95% CI: 0.69–0.91), specificity 0.88 (95% CI: 0.78–0.94), DOR 37 (95% CI: 15–91), and AUC 0.93. Heterogeneity was moderate in the BUN subgroup (bivariate I² = 51%), with 42% of variability attributed to threshold effects. Meta-regression identified study country (p = 0.01), and reference test used (p = 0.02) as contributors to heterogeneity in sensitivity, while comorbidity (p = 0.001) significantly affected specificity. Conclusion: SUN shows high diagnostic specificity and a good overall accuracy, particularly when compared to BUN, and may serve as a practical non-invasive screening tool in low- resource settings. While heterogeneity was present, SUN remains a promising diagnostic alternative and warrants further validation in diverse clinical populations.

Suggested Citation

  • Reyna Kumaran & Mona Mohamed Ibrahim Abdalla & Brinnell Annette Caszo & Sushela Devi Somanath, 2025. "Saliva urea nitrogen for detection of kidney disease in adults: A meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(5), pages 1-15, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0324251
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0324251
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0324251
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0324251&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0324251?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0324251. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.