Diagnostic yield of repeat evaluation for asymptomatic microscopic hematuria after negative initial workup.

PURPOSE

The American Urological Association guideline for asymptomatic microhematuria recommends in patients with a negative initial workup, repeat workup should be considered for those with persistent/recurrent microhematuria. However, there is little data on the yield of repeat evaluation. Our hypothesis was that repeat workup yields a low detection rate of urologic malignancy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed all patients at our institution who underwent microhematuria workup with cystoscopy and upper tract imaging from May 2010 to June 2016. Microhematuria was defined as ≥3 RBCs/HPF on a properly collected specimen in the absence of a benign cause. Demographics, age, smoking history, history of radiation, and findings on repeat cystoscopy and imaging were collected. Our primary endpoint was a new diagnosis of urologic malignancy.

RESULTS

Our initial cohort included 1,332 patients, of whom 21 were diagnosed with urothelial carcinoma and 7 with suspicious renal masses on initial workup. A total of 637 patients with negative initial workup had persistent/recurrent microhematuria. Repeat cystoscopy was performed in 161 (25%) patients at a median of 39 months, and repeat upper tract imaging was performed in 317 (50%) patients at a median of 39 months. Overall, repeat cystoscopy revealed new bladder cancer in 2 (1.2%) patients and repeat imaging revealed new suspicious renal mass in 4 (1.3%) patients.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed a low number of newly diagnosed malignancies among patients with persistent/recurrent asymptomatic microhematuria who had a prior negative workup. Additional research is required to determine the utility of a repeat AMH workup.