Parenchymal imaging adds diagnostic utility in evaluating haematuria

Jay S. Belani, Aamer Farooki, Srinivasa Prasad, Yan Yan, Jay Heiken, Adam S. Kibel

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the findings of renal ultrasonography (US) in the evaluation of patients with and with no haematuria. The increased use of cross-sectional imaging and US has led to a dramatic improvement in the diagnosis of renal masses, such that computed tomography and/or US have been integrated into the diagnostic evaluation of haematuria, and many more incidental renal lesions are now detected. Thus it is possible that the lesions identified during evaluation for haematuria are incidental, i.e. identified serendipitously, and unrelated to the haematuria. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively compared the US findings obtained from 301 patients referred for new-onset haematuria to those obtained from 600 patients being evaluated for other than urological reasons. All imaging and patient charts were reviewed to verify the clinical and radiological data. RESULTS: Haematuria was associated with all renal abnormalities, with an odds ratio (OR, 95% confidence interval) of 4.7 (3.6-7.3). Importantly, haematuria was associated with a renal mass, with an OR of 6.7 (2.8-16.3). Subset analysis revealed that patients with macroscopic and microscopic haematuria had significantly more renal abnormalities (OR 4.7, 2.7-8.2, and 5.3, 3.2-8.8, respectively) and renal masses (OR 7.3, 2.7-20.3, and 6.5, 2.3-18.6, respectively) than controls. CONCLUSIONS: Both macroscopic and microscopic haematuria are associated with a greater risk of identifying renal lesions. This supports the conclusion that the renal lesions identified with modern imaging techniques during the evaluation of both microscopic and macroscopic haematuria are not serendipitous.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)64-67
Number of pages4
JournalBJU International
Volume95
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2005
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Hematuria
Diagnostic Imaging
Kidney
Ultrasonography
Odds Ratio
Tomography
Confidence Intervals

Keywords

  • Haematuria
  • Incidental
  • Renal lesions
  • Ultrasonography

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology

Cite this

Parenchymal imaging adds diagnostic utility in evaluating haematuria. / Belani, Jay S.; Farooki, Aamer; Prasad, Srinivasa; Yan, Yan; Heiken, Jay; Kibel, Adam S.

In: BJU International, Vol. 95, No. 1, 01.01.2005, p. 64-67.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Belani, Jay S. ; Farooki, Aamer ; Prasad, Srinivasa ; Yan, Yan ; Heiken, Jay ; Kibel, Adam S. / Parenchymal imaging adds diagnostic utility in evaluating haematuria. In: BJU International. 2005 ; Vol. 95, No. 1. pp. 64-67.
@article{b6ebddde7ebe4213a6d941d03bd062d3,
title = "Parenchymal imaging adds diagnostic utility in evaluating haematuria",
abstract = "OBJECTIVE: To compare the findings of renal ultrasonography (US) in the evaluation of patients with and with no haematuria. The increased use of cross-sectional imaging and US has led to a dramatic improvement in the diagnosis of renal masses, such that computed tomography and/or US have been integrated into the diagnostic evaluation of haematuria, and many more incidental renal lesions are now detected. Thus it is possible that the lesions identified during evaluation for haematuria are incidental, i.e. identified serendipitously, and unrelated to the haematuria. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively compared the US findings obtained from 301 patients referred for new-onset haematuria to those obtained from 600 patients being evaluated for other than urological reasons. All imaging and patient charts were reviewed to verify the clinical and radiological data. RESULTS: Haematuria was associated with all renal abnormalities, with an odds ratio (OR, 95{\%} confidence interval) of 4.7 (3.6-7.3). Importantly, haematuria was associated with a renal mass, with an OR of 6.7 (2.8-16.3). Subset analysis revealed that patients with macroscopic and microscopic haematuria had significantly more renal abnormalities (OR 4.7, 2.7-8.2, and 5.3, 3.2-8.8, respectively) and renal masses (OR 7.3, 2.7-20.3, and 6.5, 2.3-18.6, respectively) than controls. CONCLUSIONS: Both macroscopic and microscopic haematuria are associated with a greater risk of identifying renal lesions. This supports the conclusion that the renal lesions identified with modern imaging techniques during the evaluation of both microscopic and macroscopic haematuria are not serendipitous.",
keywords = "Haematuria, Incidental, Renal lesions, Ultrasonography",
author = "Belani, {Jay S.} and Aamer Farooki and Srinivasa Prasad and Yan Yan and Jay Heiken and Kibel, {Adam S.}",
year = "2005",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/j.1464-410X.2005.05250.x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "95",
pages = "64--67",
journal = "BJU International",
issn = "1464-4096",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Parenchymal imaging adds diagnostic utility in evaluating haematuria

AU - Belani, Jay S.

AU - Farooki, Aamer

AU - Prasad, Srinivasa

AU - Yan, Yan

AU - Heiken, Jay

AU - Kibel, Adam S.

PY - 2005/1/1

Y1 - 2005/1/1

N2 - OBJECTIVE: To compare the findings of renal ultrasonography (US) in the evaluation of patients with and with no haematuria. The increased use of cross-sectional imaging and US has led to a dramatic improvement in the diagnosis of renal masses, such that computed tomography and/or US have been integrated into the diagnostic evaluation of haematuria, and many more incidental renal lesions are now detected. Thus it is possible that the lesions identified during evaluation for haematuria are incidental, i.e. identified serendipitously, and unrelated to the haematuria. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively compared the US findings obtained from 301 patients referred for new-onset haematuria to those obtained from 600 patients being evaluated for other than urological reasons. All imaging and patient charts were reviewed to verify the clinical and radiological data. RESULTS: Haematuria was associated with all renal abnormalities, with an odds ratio (OR, 95% confidence interval) of 4.7 (3.6-7.3). Importantly, haematuria was associated with a renal mass, with an OR of 6.7 (2.8-16.3). Subset analysis revealed that patients with macroscopic and microscopic haematuria had significantly more renal abnormalities (OR 4.7, 2.7-8.2, and 5.3, 3.2-8.8, respectively) and renal masses (OR 7.3, 2.7-20.3, and 6.5, 2.3-18.6, respectively) than controls. CONCLUSIONS: Both macroscopic and microscopic haematuria are associated with a greater risk of identifying renal lesions. This supports the conclusion that the renal lesions identified with modern imaging techniques during the evaluation of both microscopic and macroscopic haematuria are not serendipitous.

AB - OBJECTIVE: To compare the findings of renal ultrasonography (US) in the evaluation of patients with and with no haematuria. The increased use of cross-sectional imaging and US has led to a dramatic improvement in the diagnosis of renal masses, such that computed tomography and/or US have been integrated into the diagnostic evaluation of haematuria, and many more incidental renal lesions are now detected. Thus it is possible that the lesions identified during evaluation for haematuria are incidental, i.e. identified serendipitously, and unrelated to the haematuria. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively compared the US findings obtained from 301 patients referred for new-onset haematuria to those obtained from 600 patients being evaluated for other than urological reasons. All imaging and patient charts were reviewed to verify the clinical and radiological data. RESULTS: Haematuria was associated with all renal abnormalities, with an odds ratio (OR, 95% confidence interval) of 4.7 (3.6-7.3). Importantly, haematuria was associated with a renal mass, with an OR of 6.7 (2.8-16.3). Subset analysis revealed that patients with macroscopic and microscopic haematuria had significantly more renal abnormalities (OR 4.7, 2.7-8.2, and 5.3, 3.2-8.8, respectively) and renal masses (OR 7.3, 2.7-20.3, and 6.5, 2.3-18.6, respectively) than controls. CONCLUSIONS: Both macroscopic and microscopic haematuria are associated with a greater risk of identifying renal lesions. This supports the conclusion that the renal lesions identified with modern imaging techniques during the evaluation of both microscopic and macroscopic haematuria are not serendipitous.

KW - Haematuria

KW - Incidental

KW - Renal lesions

KW - Ultrasonography

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=12544256132&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=12544256132&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2005.05250.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2005.05250.x

M3 - Article

C2 - 15638896

AN - SCOPUS:12544256132

VL - 95

SP - 64

EP - 67

JO - BJU International

JF - BJU International

SN - 1464-4096

IS - 1

ER -