Diagnostic and Cost Implications of the 2020 AUA Microhematuria Guidelines: Modeling Impact in a Large Public Health Care System

Purpose: We sought to model the diagnostic recommendations and associated costs of new hematuria guidelines regarding referral patterns, procedure utilization and urothelial cell carcinoma (UCC) detection. Materials and Methods: Patients with microhematuria were identified retrospectively. Initial encounter data were collected from January 2017 to May 2018 from a large public health care system; followup was continued to December 2020. Risk stratification was performed based on the American Urological Association 2020 microhematuria guidelines, and disease outcomes were analyzed within this framework. The guideline-recommended workups and costs were modeled; cost data were sourced from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Medicare Physician Fee Schedule and Clinical Laboratory Fee Schedule for 2020. Modeled diagnostic volumes and costs were assessed for 2020 and 2012 microhematuria guidelines, respectively. Results: Of the 3,789 patients included for analysis, 1,382 (36.5%), 1,026 (27.1%) and 1,381 (36.4%) were retroactively stratified as low risk, intermediate risk (InR) and high risk (HiR), respectively. A total of 19 cases of UCC (17 bladder, 2 upper tract) were diagnosed, of which 84% were HiR. For high-grade UCC, 92% of cases were HiR. The 2020 guidelines recommended renal ultrasound for 1,117 InR cases, computerized tomography urogram (CTU) for 1,476 HiR cases, and cystoscopy for 2,593 InR and HiR cases combined. Total costs were $1,905,236 (2012) versus $1,260,677 (2020), driven mainly by CTU costs. Per-cancer detected costs were $100,276 (2012) versus $61,760 (2020). Conclusions: In retrospect, the 2020 guidelines would have effectively risk-stratified microhematuria cases for detection of malignancies. As compared to the 2012 guidelines, application of the 2020 guidelines would result in significant changes to diagnostic and procedural volumes, while substantially reducing total and per-patient costs.

[1]  Resident Adem Sancı,et al.  COMPARISON OF MICROSCOPIC HEMATURIA GUIDELINES AS APPLIED IN 1,018 PATIENTS WITH MICROSCOPIC HEMATURIA. , 2021, Urology.

[2]  Y. Lotan,et al.  Evaluation of the New American Urological Association Guidelines Risk Classification for Hematuria. , 2020, The Journal of urology.

[3]  C. Gross,et al.  Microhematuria: AUA/SUFU Guideline. , 2020, The Journal of urology.

[4]  I. Akushevich,et al.  The Cost to Medicare of Bladder Cancer Care. , 2020, European urology oncology.

[5]  Y. Lotan,et al.  Evaluation of Hematuria in a Large Public Health Care System , 2019, Bladder cancer.

[6]  A. Feber,et al.  Can Renal and Bladder Ultrasound Replace Computerized Tomography Urogram in Patients Investigated for Microscopic Hematuria? , 2018, The Journal of urology.

[7]  H. Ghomrawi,et al.  Cost-effectiveness of Common Diagnostic Approaches for Evaluation of Asymptomatic Microscopic Hematuria , 2017, JAMA internal medicine.

[8]  C. Seideman,et al.  What is evaluation of hematuria by primary care physicians? Use of electronic medical records to assess practice patterns with intermediate follow-up. , 2014, Urologic oncology.

[9]  G. Lyratzopoulos,et al.  Gender inequalities in the promptness of diagnosis of bladder and renal cancer after symptomatic presentation: evidence from secondary analysis of an English primary care audit survey , 2013, BMJ Open.

[10]  S. Jacobsen,et al.  Stratifying risk of urinary tract malignant tumors in patients with asymptomatic microscopic hematuria. , 2013, Mayo Clinic proceedings.

[11]  Scott D. Miller,et al.  Diagnosis, evaluation and follow-up of asymptomatic microhematuria (AMH) in adults: AUA guideline. , 2012, The Journal of urology.

[12]  S. Jacobsen,et al.  Association of hematuria on microscopic urinalysis and risk of urinary tract cancer. , 2011, The Journal of urology.

[13]  W. Kassouf,et al.  Patients with microscopic and gross hematuria: practice and referral patterns among primary care physicians in a universal health care system. , 2011, Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada.

[14]  Y. Lotan,et al.  High‐risk patients with hematuria are not evaluated according to guideline recommendations , 2010, Cancer.

[15]  Cheryl T. Lee,et al.  Patterns of hematuria referral to urologists: does a gender disparity exist? , 2008, Urology.

[16]  C. Porter,et al.  Urothelial neoplasms of the kidney and ureter. An epidemiologic, pathologic, and clinical review. , 2002, American journal of clinical pathology.

[17]  L. Kessler,et al.  Medicare Payments from Diagnosis to Death for Elderly Cancer Patients by Stage at Diagnosis , 1995, Medical care.

[18]  A. Mariani,et al.  The significance of adult hematuria: 1,000 hematuria evaluations including a risk-benefit and cost-effectiveness analysis. , 1989, The Journal of urology.