Routine CT urography in microhematuria patients of limited value: JAMA
According to recent study findings, acknowledging the low diagnostic yield of CT urography and the associated risks and costs, limiting its use to high-risk patients older than 50 years has been warranted. Further,it was highlighted that risk stratification, as recommended by the recent American Urology Association guidelines on MH, may be a better approach to tailor...
According to recent study findings, acknowledging the low diagnostic yield of CT urography and the associated risks and costs, limiting its use to high-risk patients older than 50 years has been warranted. Further,it was highlighted that risk stratification, as recommended by the recent American Urology Association guidelines on MH, may be a better approach to tailor further evaluation. Findings have been published in JAMA.
Microhematuria (MH) is a common finding that often leads to further evaluation for urinary tract cancers. There is ongoing debate about the extent to which patients with MH should be evaluated for cancer.
Researchers undertook the current study to assess the diagnostic yield for detection of urinary tract cancers, specifically bladder cancer, upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC), and kidney cell carcinoma, among patients evaluated for MH using cystoscopy and computed tomographic (CT) urography.
Data Sources included MEDLINE, Scopus, and Embase were systematically searched for eligible studies published between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2019. Original prospective and retrospective studies reporting the prevalence of cancer among patients evaluated for MH were eligible. Two authors independently screened the titles and abstracts to select studies that met the eligibility criteria and reached consensus about which studies to include. Among 5802 records identified, 5802 articles were screened using titles and abstracts. After exclusions, 55 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility, with 39 studies selected for systematic review.
The primary outcome was diagnostic yield, defined as the proportion of patients with a diagnosis of urinary tract cancer (bladder cancer, UTUC, or kidney cell carcinoma) after presentation with MH. Studies were stratified by the percentage of cystoscopy and CT urography use and by high-risk cohorts. The diagnostic yields of CT urography and cystoscopy were calculated for each cancer type.
Results highlighted the following facts.
- A total of 30 studies comprising 24 366 patients evaluated for MH were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled diagnostic yield among all patients was 2.00% (95% CI, 1.30%-3.09%) for bladder cancer, 0.02% (95% CI, 0.0%-0.15%) for UTUC, and 0.18% (95% CI, 0.09%-0.36%) for kidney cell carcinoma.
- Stratification of studies that used cystoscopy and/or CT urography for 95% or more of the cohort produced diagnostic yields of 2.74% (95% CI, 1.81%-4.12%) for bladder cancer, 0.09% (95% CI, 0.01%-0.75%) for UTUC, and 0.10% (95% CI, 0.04%-0.23%) for kidney cell carcinoma.
- In high-risk cohorts, the diagnostic yields increased to 4.61% (95% CI, 2.34%-8.90%) for bladder cancer and 0.45% (95% CI, 0.22%-0.95%) for UTUC.
Observing the results the research team concluded that, " The routine use of cystoscopy to evaluate all patients with MH also seems debatable. The use of an individual risk-stratified evaluation strategy based on personal risk factors, as recommended by recent AUA guidelines, may be a better approach to assess whether further evaluation is necessary among patients with MH."
For full article follow the link: doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.8409
Primary source:JAMA
Disclaimer: This site is primarily intended for healthcare professionals. Any content/information on this website does not replace the advice of medical and/or health professionals and should not be construed as medical/diagnostic advice/endorsement/treatment or prescription. Use of this site is subject to our terms of use, privacy policy, advertisement policy. © 2024 Minerva Medical Treatment Pvt Ltd