Proteinuria?

[DayaraLee]

Well, the dreaded 6-month lab work and visit to the nephrologist has come and gone. G's values seem to be holding steady, something for which I'm very grateful. His BP was fabulous at 117/80 (better than mine!). The neph actually said, "Your kidney disease looks stable." I call him the old codger in my head, because he barely speaks more than 30 words to either of us during the appointment, which annoys me to no end. Forthcoming and personable are words that would NEVER be used to describe him.

For the last year, we've gotten something new when we leave the office - exit paperwork that provides not just lab results, but also medication list, diagnosis on referral, current diagnosis, etc. G's diagnosis has always been CKD Stage 3, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and hyperlipidemia. Today, "proteinuric diabetic nephropathy" was added.      And I understand what it is and what it means... Problem is, G has never, not once in urinalyses or labs since 2005, had protein in his urine (or albumin, for that matter, beyond the 15-30 mg/g threshold).

My question... Does anyone know if there could there be other reasons or requirements for attaching that particular diagnosis, when the proteinuric part doesn't (or doesn't yet) apply? In the scheme of things, I'm sure it doesn't matter very much. But for me, accuracy counts. If that little piece is not correct or exact, what other little pieces might not be right??  Has anyone else had inaccuracies like these in their records? Should I just ignore it? 

[Deanne]

It might have just been a typo / mis-click of the mouse and they meant to include non-proteinuric diabetic nephropathy in his case notes. You're right in that the label probably doesn't change anything, but since it's bothersome, it can't hurt to call and ask about it.

[DayaraLee]

Thank you, Deanne. I try not to hyper-focus on the small details too much, but sometimes it gets away from me. I'll probably call next week to see if it was a typo, as you suggested.