A comparison between transabdominal ultrasonographic and cystourethroscopy findings in adult Sudanese patients presenting with haematuria.

PURPOSE

Gross and microscopic haematuria both are a common cause of referral to urology clinics. It has a wide spectrum of differential. In many occasions, it is a presentation of underlining serious urological problems. Evaluation of gross and significant microscopic haematuria is of paramount importance. This study was conducted to assess and compare the findings and diagnostic competency of transabdominal ultrasonography (US) versus cystourethroscopy in patients with haematuria of lower urinary tract origin.

METHODS

Prospective hospital-based study done at Ibn Sina Specialized and Omdurman Military Hospitals from June 2012 to March 2013. The study included 109 patients. Structured questionnaires were used to gather data from patients. All patients were evaluated by transabdominal US before cystourethroscopy examination.

RESULTS

One hundred and nine patients were studied. Patients' mean (SD) age was 57.9 (18.8) years. Fifty-four patients (49.5 %) presented with macroscopic haematuria, while 55 patients presented with microscopic haematuria. The sensitivity and specificity of the US in detecting prostate enlargement, vesical stones, bladder wall tumour, cystitis and schistosomiasis were [(84, 80 %); (82.6, 97.7 %); (64.7, 92.1 %); (15.3, 96.8 %); and (15.3, 98.9 %)], respectively, as compared to cystoscopic finding as the gold standard.

CONCLUSIONS

Ultrasonography is accepted only as a first-line imaging tool for evaluation of haematuria in poor settings, but cannot replace or became as good as cystoscopy, which remains the gold standard.