So long story short- I had my urine sample taken yesterday and they checked for glucose. It came back saying that it was over 2000. But my blood sugars when i check with my meter have been averaging 160.- They haven't been anywhere near 2000. Sure occasionally i'll get highs around 300 but they come down.
Any thoughts? Are my kidney's screwed?
Are they testing for glucose or spilling of protein in your urine? I thought they stopped testing sugar in urine years ago.
glucose. I have an apt with my endo where they'll probably check the protein
2000 is a strange result for glucose in urine. I am wondering like Jim what they were testing.
Normal glucose range in urine: 0 - 0.8 mmol/l (0 - 15 mg/dL) so 2000 is seriously questionable.
Also, urine glucose measure and blood glucose measure will not be the same, so a 160 on your meter would not equal 160 on a urine test. 2000 on a meter would be another strange result.
If you are averaging 160, (meaning half the time you are above 160), then you are probably spilling a good amount of glucose in your urine. Threshold for spilling is often around 160.
but not that high, no?
Glucose is actually concentrated in the urine by the kidneys. So concentration in urine can be higher than in the blood.
I stopped measuring glucose in urine when I purchased my first glucometer in 1985 ...we talked about threshold of 180 ( everyone is probably different) ...I can't help you ..and I am confused about your question .
Tim is right, the renal threshold for glucose is 160-180 mg/dl and although you might be under 160 mg/dl 2 hrs after a meal, you could still dump a good deal of sugar in your urine with a meal spike. And I don't know what 2000 means. As Karen says, it isn't even in the range. If you are dehydrated you could also end up with glucose in your urine that is not really proportional to you blood sugar.
Few docs today would try to manage diabetes by using urine test results. I don't think an endo would ever try to do it that way at least not since the 1990's and widely available bg testing.
We did it in decades past but glucose testing is so much more effective in actually managing insulin doses etc.
Certainly, for a diabetic who is averaging 160, seeing glucose in the urine should not be a surprise. Any significant glucose in urine may be noted as a "out of normal range" result on the lab report, sure.
I think everyones confused hah.
Let me clarify- I went for a health screening at new job I may be taking. One of the things they did was take a urine sample and check it for glucose. It said my glucose was over 2000 mg/dl.
I have an apt with my endo to clear things up.
A dipstick reading of 4+ would correspond to a blood sugar reading of 2000 mg/dl. Bur it is not a direct relationahip and can be affect by things like dehydration.
I'm on a antibiotic that can make people dehydrated. Perhaps it's related. Thanks.
Nel - even in 1981 I was using a crude lancet device and some blood test strips that allowed you to visually check your blood glucose by the change in colour. Something is fishy. A BG of 2000 mg/dL as we know it is clearly not possible.
There’s no way you’d have a blood glucose of 2000 mgdl in your urine. Maybe it was 200? There would be something seriously wrong if it wa 2000 or something wrong with whatever tested the urine sample.
Oh, heavens...where was this health screening done? I've had a couple of really bizarre experiences with companies that had company nurses do the health screening tests....usually done by nurses that either should have been retired years ago or by nurses who couldn't make it in hospital/professional doctor office settings but could get hired (cheaply) by a company to do simple pre-employment testing.
One told me that I had sugar in my urine and that I was probably going to die from diabetes...this was over 16 years before I developed diabetes. The test was not fasting, I'd had a big bowl of cereal with sugar shortly beforehand, and a glucose tolerance test that I was forced to take because of that came back perfectly normal.
Another time the nurse noticed I had a cut on my finger that wasn't bandaged, and she cheerfully informed me that since it was uncovered, germs were getting into it and it was probably going to get infected and I'd need to have my thumb amputated.
So...I'd go with your own doctor's numbers and not worry too much about the urine test...unless it keeps them from hiring you?
When I was in dka I had 1000+ glucose in my urine, I think, I don't think it was considered normal... not sure what yours means...
Ya but when you were in dka your blood glucose was prob also really high! The op is saying his bg's usually are always around 160. Occasional 300s wouldn't make your urine always high either. If your bg was 300 at the time the urine sample was taken it would be high but I still don't think it would be possible to be at 2000 and not have signs of something seriously wrong.
yes, true, my finger stick was 279 when the urinalysis was done, I think the urine was 1000++, ketones 160+, protein 100++. And my a1c was 13%. Obviously my body was desperately trying to dump glucose...I agree, I don't think when we have an occasional spike it will show up in urine that high, I don't know that much about other causes.
Certain types of MODY cause people to spill glucose at relatively low blood glucose levels.
“Glycosuria at relatively normal blood glucose levels is often seen as these patients have a low renal threshold due to reduced expression of the high-affinity low-capacity glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2), leading to decreased resorption of glucose from the renal tubules”
The strips I have for urine glucose go up to < 1000 mg/dl. So all you really know at that point is the level is your urine is 1000 mg/dl or greater. I find that with urine glucose levels it is an all or nothing phenomenon. If I am spilling glucose in my urine, it is at 4+ i.e. 1000 mg/dl. It is either negative or 4+ never anything in between. And I spill glucose at a bg of 162