» Articles » PMID: 21373244

National Practice Recommendations for Hematuria: How to Evaluate in the Absence of Strong Evidence?

Overview
Journal Perm J
Date 2011 Mar 5
PMID 21373244
Citations 9
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Hematuria is one of the most common conditions confronting clinical urologists and is present in many genitourinary pathology conditions. Although researchers have studied hematuria symptoms in an effort to determine the best diagnostic pathway, the existing lack of scientific evidence has created variations in clinical practice. The literature does not provide enough evidence to significantly alter the need to assess these patients. Consequently, many patients with microscopic or gross hematuria undergo low-yield workups that include invasive testing and imaging with radiation. In 2007, a national group of Kaiser Permanente (KP) urology chiefs agreed that national practice recommendations were needed to address existing variations in the management and workup of hematuria. Using a KP guideline methodology, the group reached a consensus agreement on the following recommendations: 1) referral to urology is recommended for all people with gross hematuria or high-grade hematuria (>50 red blood cells per high-power field [RBCs/HPF]) on a single urinalysis (UA); 2) referral to urology and urologic evaluation is recommended for men or women with asymptomatic microscopic hematuria or symptomatic hematuria that produces >3 RBCs/HPF on two of three properly performed and collected urinalyses; and 3) voided urinary cytology should be eliminated from asymptomatic hematuria screening protocol. The test is not sensitive enough to obviate further workup if findings are negative, and elimination of this screening test is estimated to save millions of dollars across the US. Hematuria on a UA should be reported as 0 to 3 RBC/HPF, 4 to 10 RBC/HPF, 11 to 25 RBC/HPF, 26 to 50 RBC/HPF, >50 RBC/HPF, or gross hematuria. This approach will also reduce radiation exposure.

Citing Articles

Risk stratification and diagnostic evaluation of patients found to have microscopic hematuria by their primary care providers.

An C, Jeong J, Chiu C, Gaston E, Kennedy A, Sternberg K J Gen Fam Med. 2025; 26(1):73-78.

PMID: 39776878 PMC: 11702366. DOI: 10.1002/jgf2.740.


Urothelial Malignancy After Normal Hematuria Clinic Investigations: Does Non-visible Hematuria Need Reinvestigation?.

Thompson A, James B, David R, Youseff M, Gill N, Jefferies M Urol Res Pract. 2024; 50(2):102-106.

PMID: 39128127 PMC: 11232076. DOI: 10.5152/tud.2024.23025.


Stratifying risk of disease in haematuria patients using machine learning techniques to improve diagnostics.

Drozdz A, Duggan B, Ruddock M, Reid C, Kurth M, Watt J Front Oncol. 2024; 14:1401071.

PMID: 38779086 PMC: 11109371. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2024.1401071.


Renal Function Recovery Strategies Following Marathon in Amateur Runners.

Hernando C, Hernando C, Panizo N, Collado-Boira E, Folch-Ayora A, Martinez-Navarro I Front Physiol. 2022; 13:812237.

PMID: 35295572 PMC: 8918951. DOI: 10.3389/fphys.2022.812237.


Painless Visible Haematuria in Adults: An Algorithmic Approach Guiding Management.

Dulku G, Shivananda A, Chakera A, Mendelson R, Hayne D Cureus. 2019; 11(11):e6140.

PMID: 31886075 PMC: 6907722. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.6140.


References
1.
Sarosdy M, Schellhammer P, Bokinsky G, Kahn P, Chao R, Yore L . Clinical evaluation of a multi-target fluorescent in situ hybridization assay for detection of bladder cancer. J Urol. 2002; 168(5):1950-4. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)64270-X. View

2.
Mariani A, Mariani M, Macchioni C, Stams U, Hariharan A, Moriera A . The significance of adult hematuria: 1,000 hematuria evaluations including a risk-benefit and cost-effectiveness analysis. J Urol. 1989; 141(2):350-5. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)40763-4. View

3.
Liu W, Esler S, Kenny B, Goh R, Rainbow A, Stevenson G . Low-dose nonenhanced helical CT of renal colic: assessment of ureteric stone detection and measurement of effective dose equivalent. Radiology. 2001; 215(1):51-4. DOI: 10.1148/radiology.215.1.r00ap4051. View

4.
Albani J, Ciaschini M, Streem S, Herts B, Angermeier K . The role of computerized tomographic urography in the initial evaluation of hematuria. J Urol. 2007; 177(2):644-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2006.09.065. View

5.
Hamm M, Knopfle E, Wartenberg S, Wawroschek F, Weckermann D, Harzmann R . Low dose unenhanced helical computerized tomography for the evaluation of acute flank pain. J Urol. 2002; 167(4):1687-91. View