Matulewicz Richard S, DeLancey John Oliver, Pavey Emily, Schaeffer Edward M, Popescu Oana, Meeks Joshua J
Department of Urology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA; Department of Surgery, Surgical Outcome and Quality Improvement Center (SOQIC), Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA.
Department of Surgery, Surgical Outcome and Quality Improvement Center (SOQIC), Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine , Chicago, IL, USA.
Bladder Cancer. 2017 Jan 27;3(1):45-49. doi: 10.3233/BLC-160068.
There is a lack of evidence supporting the routine use of laboratory tests to detect bladder cancer. Identifying a cost-effective and widely available diagnostic aid may improve bladder cancer outcomes. We sought to evaluate the utility of dipstick urinalysis to detect microhematuria and diagnose bladder cancer in a large, diverse, contemporary cohort. All non-pregnant women and men 35 and older with a new diagnosis of microhematuria (≥3 RBC/hpf) were identified via a multi-center electronic medical record data warehouse query. Negative controls with no history of hematuria were randomly chosen and included to complete our cohort. Comparison between dipstick urinalysis and microscopic urinalysis on self-matched patients for the detection of microhematuria and diagnosis of bladder cancer was performed via Spearman's rank correlation coefficient, sensitivity/specificity testing, and ROC curve analysis. A total of 46,842 patients were included. Spearman's rank order correlation (rho = 0.66) between degree of microhematuria on dipstick urinalysis and microscopic urinalysis indicated a strong positive relationship. The ROC curve for dipstick urinalysis to identify microhematuria had an AUC of 0.80 (95% CI 0.79-0.81). No difference ( = 0.83) in diagnostic accuracy between dipstick urinalysis (AUC 0.74, 95% CI 0.70-0.78) and microscopic urinalysis (AUC 0.73, 95% CI 0.69-0.78) as a test for bladder cancer was found. Dipstick urinalysis provides a highly specific test for microhematuria and similar accuracy to microscopic urinalysis when used as a diagnostic tool to detect bladder cancer.
缺乏证据支持常规使用实验室检测来诊断膀胱癌。确定一种具有成本效益且广泛可用的诊断辅助手段可能会改善膀胱癌的诊疗结果。我们试图评估试纸条尿液分析在一个大型、多样化的当代队列中检测微量血尿和诊断膀胱癌的效用。通过多中心电子病历数据仓库查询,识别出所有新诊断为微量血尿(≥3个红细胞/高倍视野)的35岁及以上非妊娠女性和男性。随机选择无血尿病史的阴性对照纳入研究以完善我们的队列。通过Spearman等级相关系数、灵敏度/特异度测试和ROC曲线分析,对自我匹配患者的试纸条尿液分析和显微镜尿液分析在检测微量血尿和诊断膀胱癌方面进行比较。共纳入46842例患者。试纸条尿液分析和显微镜尿液分析的微量血尿程度之间的Spearman等级相关(rho = 0.66)表明存在强正相关关系。试纸条尿液分析识别微量血尿的ROC曲线的AUC为0.80(95%CI 0.79 - 0.81)。作为膀胱癌检测手段,试纸条尿液分析(AUC 0.74,95%CI 0.70 - 0.78)和显微镜尿液分析(AUC 0.73,95%CI 0.69 - 0.78)在诊断准确性上没有差异( = 0.83)。试纸条尿液分析对微量血尿具有高度特异性,并且在用作检测膀胱癌的诊断工具时,其准确性与显微镜尿液分析相似。