Should the presence of a culture positive urinary tract infection exclude patients from rapid evaluation hematuria protocols?

Abstract

ObjectiveCurrent rapid evaluation protocols for patients with hematuria tend to exclude those with urinary tract infection since this is assumed to be evidence of a benign treatable cause. The likelihood of a urinary tract cancer in such patients is, however, uncertain, and we have therefore analyzed a prospective hematuria clinic database to determine risk. Patients and methodsA total of 1,740 patients were enrolled prospectively in this study at our unit's one stop fast track hematuria clinic between April 2003 and March 2006. Evaluation of patients consisted of basic demographics, history and examination, urinalysis, urine culture, urine cytology, and serum creatinine. All patients then underwent a renal ultrasound, intravenous urogram, and cystoscopy. ResultsA total of 1,067 males and 673 females with a mean (range) age of 60.8 (16–96) years were included in the study. One hundred sixty-one patients had a positive mid-stream urine (MSU) on a specimen collected at the hematuria clinic. Amongst this group 20% (32) patients had a urologic malignancy diagnosed, of whom 12% (4) had metastatic disease at presentation. Only 1% (3) of patients had a urologic malignancy with a previous history of a treated urinary tract infection (UTI) and negative MSU at the clinic. The risk of urologic malignancy was 24% (303) in the remaining 1,249 patients with no history of a UTI prior to presentation and a negative MSU on a specimen collected at the one stop fast track hematuria clinic. ConclusionDespite selection bias inherent in this analysis, it appears that the presence of UTI does not decrease the likelihood of having a urologic malignancy diagnosed. Hence, there is no indication to delay prompt evaluation in patients with hematuria and a positive urine culture collected at the hematuria clinic.