Sandbox:Hematuria differential diagnosis
Gross hematuria should always be considered significant, because it is a sign of malignancy until proven otherwise. Roughly 4% of patients with microscopic hematuria and up to 40% of patients with gross hematuria could be harboring a malignancy.[1]
False-positive microhematuria in dipsticks urinalysis caused by the presence of semen in urine.[2]
Current practice for the investigation of hematuria is set out in Campbell's Urology [1] as follows: "Hematuria may be gross or microscopic, but it must be emphasized that the degree of hematuria bears no relationship to the possible cause. Any red blood cells seen in a centrifuged specimen of urine must be considered significant. Hematuria should never be ignored, and no matter how trivial the bleeding may seem, a complete urological investigation into its cause is mandatory."[3]
References
- ↑ Avellino GJ, Bose S, Wang DS (2016). "Diagnosis and Management of Hematuria". Surg Clin North Am. 96 (3): 503–15. doi:10.1016/j.suc.2016.02.007. PMID 27261791.
- ↑ Mazouz B, Almagor M (2003). "False-positive microhematuria in dipsticks urinalysis caused by the presence of semen in urine". Clin Biochem. 36 (3): 229–31. PMID 12726934.
- ↑ Fairley KF, Birch DF (1982). "Hematuria: a simple method for identifying glomerular bleeding". Kidney Int. 21 (1): 105–8. PMID 7077941.