General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

microsopic hematuria question

Started by Mm · · Last activity · 3 posts · 1,608 views

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
5 July 2004
Last activity
5 July 2004
Original author
Mm
Posts
3
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
1,608
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–3 of 3
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. I'm new to the group, so forgive me if this post is too long
    or not on topic. I'm a 43 yo male. At a routine physical a
    few months ago, a urine sample came back positive for
    microscopic hematuria. The family doc ordered an IVP, which
    came back clean, except that it showed a small trabecular
    pattern on the bladder. Doc refered me to a urologist. Did a
    prostate exam, which was normal. He ordered a kidney
    ultrasound, which was fine, except the radiologist
    questioned the way one of the kidneys looked. Back to the
    urologist who then ordered a CT scan, which showed
    everything was fine. After my fourth visit to the urologist,
    he indicated he wanted to do a cystoscopy. He also indicated
    that he didn't want to do it in the usual way (flex scope in
    office) because he felt the opening of the urethra needed to
    be enlarged with a metasaphy ?(basically enlarging the
    opening). He said he would do it under general anesthetic
    with a rigid scope. He indicated that this procedure would
    improve my "flow" which I never knew I had a problem with--
    seem to have a nice, steady stream. Today, I canceled the
    test for several reasons.
    1) I'm just physcially, emotionally, and financially spent
    from this run around and can't think straight about this.
    2)After doing some research on the subject, I have begun to
    question if microscopic hematuria has any predictive value
    at all. Many studies don't even recommend testing for it.
    3)The four urine samples I have given at the urologist over
    the past couple of months have all been clean. I should
    also add that doing research on this led me to discover
    how to properly give a "clean catch" urine sample. The one
    that tested positive for microscopic hematuria was not
    done that way. Also, it took two weeks to get this sample
    back from the hospital lab, whereas the samples in the
    urologist's office were all tested immediately.
    4) Coincidentally, my father had the same diagnosis in a
    routine urine test 40 years ago; he is in his 70's now.
    My brother (46)had the same diagnosis some 20 years ago
    and continues to have it on occasion in his urine tests.
    My father had a cysto done which showed nothing, but my
    brother did not (he may have had some radiographic
    studies, however--all clean).
    5) I have no symptons, no irregularities in type or
    frequency of urination. Two years ago, I had the same
    thing happen to me on a routine urine test with a
    different family doc, who recommended doing the test
    again and it came back clean, so we didn't pursue it.
    I've questioned the urologist about doing culures or
    microscopic analysis of the urine to see if there is any
    blood, which I guess there wouldn't be, since they all
    came back clean since I have been going there. His
    response is that it isn't "standard of care."

    Any thoughts from anyone with similar experiences? I am just
    going crazy with this thing.

  2. Your approach sounds reasonable. But why not get a 2nd
    opinion?

    Larry E.

    mm said:

    I'm new to the group, so forgive me if this post is too
    long or not on topic. I'm a 43 yo male. At a routine
    physical a few months ago, a urine sample came back
    positive for microscopic hematuria. The family doc ordered
    an IVP, which came back clean, except that it showed a
    small trabecular pattern on the bladder. Doc refered me to
    a urologist. Did a prostate exam, which was normal. He
    ordered a kidney ultrasound, which was fine, except the
    radiologist questioned the way one of the kidneys looked.
    Back to the urologist who then ordered a CT scan, which
    showed everything was fine. After my fourth visit to the
    urologist, he indicated he wanted to do a cystoscopy. He
    also indicated that he didn't want to do it in the usual
    way (flex scope in office) because he felt the opening of
    the urethra needed to be enlarged with a metasaphy
    ?(basically enlarging the opening). He said he would do it
    under general anesthetic with a rigid scope. He indicated
    that this procedure would improve my "flow" which I never
    knew I had a problem with--seem to have a nice, steady
    stream. Today, I canceled the test for several reasons.
    1) I'm just physcially, emotionally, and financially spent
    from this run around and can't think straight about
    this.
    2)After doing some research on the subject, I have begun
    to question if microscopic hematuria has any predictive
    value at all. Many studies don't even recommend testing
    for it.
    3)The four urine samples I have given at the urologist
    over the past couple of months have all been clean. I
    should also add that doing research on this led me to
    discover how to properly give a "clean catch" urine
    sample. The one that tested positive for microscopic
    hematuria was not done that way. Also, it took two weeks
    to get this sample back from the hospital lab, whereas
    the samples in the urologist's office were all tested
    immediately.
    4) Coincidentally, my father had the same diagnosis in a
    routine urine test 40 years ago; he is in his 70's now.
    My brother (46)had the same diagnosis some 20 years ago
    and continues to have it on occasion in his urine
    tests. My father had a cysto done which showed nothing,
    but my brother did not (he may have had some
    radiographic studies, however--all clean).
    5) I have no symptons, no irregularities in type or
    frequency of urination. Two years ago, I had the same
    thing happen to me on a routine urine test with a
    different family doc, who recommended doing the test
    again and it came back clean, so we didn't pursue it.
    I've questioned the urologist about doing culures or
    microscopic analysis of the urine to see if there is
    any blood, which I guess there wouldn't be, since they
    all came back clean since I have been going there. His
    response is that it isn't "standard of care."

    Any thoughts from anyone with similar experiences? I am
    just going crazy with this thing.

  3. mm said:

    came back clean, so we didn't pursue it. I've questioned
    the urologist about doing culures or microscopic analysis
    of the urine to see if there is any blood, which I guess
    there wouldn't be, since they all came back clean since I
    have been going there. His response is that it isn't
    "standard of care."

    Any thoughts from anyone with similar experiences? I am
    just going crazy with this thing.


    Consider it a learning experience and get on with your
    life..

    --
    madiba

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.