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
Review
. 2004 Mar;88(2):329-43.
doi: 10.1016/S0025-7125(03)00172-X.

Evaluation of the patient with hematuria

Affiliations
Review

Evaluation of the patient with hematuria

Edward J Yun et al. Med Clin North Am. 2004 Mar.

Abstract

There is little controversy regarding whether gross or visible hematuria requires complete upper and lower urinary tract evaluation. With regard to microscopic hematuria, investigators have disagreed on precisely which patients require a complete work-up. Most agree that older patients (> 40 years), patients with a history of cigarette use, and those with occupational exposure or history of chronic phenacetin use should absolutely undergo upper tract imaging, cystourethroscopy, and cytologic examination of the urine in addition to a thorough history and physical examination. A multidisciplinary group of oncologists, radiologists, urologists, and internists has published its recommendations as part of the American Urological Association best practice policy. The formal guidelines, which were distributed, rereviewed, and modified following a nationwide survey of clinicians, recommend complete urologic evaluation for all patients with microscopic hematuria who are over 40 years of age, and younger patients with a history suspicious for urologic disease. This identifies those at highest risk for malignancy while minimizing the number of evaluations in patients unlikely harboring significant disease.

PubMed Disclaimer

LinkOut - more resources