Hematuria Secondary to Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Retrospective Analysis of 166 Men Identified in a Single One Stop Hematuria Clinic

Introduction: Hematuria secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) can occur due to a vascular primary gland itself or due to the vascular re-growth of the prostate following a transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). We aim to evaluate the clinical presentation and management in patients within both these groups. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively archived the data of 166 men diagnosed with hematuria secondary to BPH from our hematuria clinic database from March 2003 and March 2006. The 166 patients were divided into 2 groups: Group I (n = 94) hematuria with no previous TURP; Group II (n = 72) hematuria with previous TURP. The clinical management in both groups included reassurance, commencement of a 5-alpha reductase inhibitor (finasteride) or a primary TURP in Group I or re-do TURP in Group II. Results: The median age was 73 years (range 45–94 years) for both groups. Outcomes combined for both groups included: reassurance alone in 26% (n = 43), finasteride in 51% (n = 84) and TURP in 12% (n = 19). Patients managed with reassurance alone or TURP had no further episodes of hematuria. At a mean follow-up was 18 months (range 7–22 months), 2 patients treated with finasteride re-bled but did require further intervention. A further 2 men elected to stop finasteride due to erectile dysfunction and gynecomastia respectively. Conclusion: BPH can present with hematuria. Following re-evaluation in a hematuria clinic, the lack of any subsequent cancer diagnosis in these patients suggests that repeat hematuria investigations should be carefully re-considered.

[1]  Vivekanandan Kumar A PROSPECTIVE ANALYSIS OF THE DIAGNOSTIC YIELD RESULTING FROM THE ATTENDANCE OF 4020 PATIENTS AT A PROTOCOL‐DRIVEN HAEMATURIA CLINIC , 2007, BJU international.

[2]  D. Neal,et al.  Diagnostic tests and algorithms used in the investigation of haematuria: systematic reviews and economic evaluation. , 2006, Health technology assessment.

[3]  J. McGrath,et al.  A prospective analysis of the diagnostic yield resulting from the attendance of 4020 patients at a protocol‐driven haematuria clinic , 2006, BJU international.

[4]  A. Mariani Re: A prospective analysis of 1,930 patients with hematuria to evaluate current diagnostic practice. , 2001, The Journal of urology.

[5]  R. Hash Asymptomatic microscopic hematuria. , 2000, American family physician.

[6]  D. Neal,et al.  A prospective analysis of 1,930 patients with hematuria to evaluate current diagnostic practice. , 2000, The Journal of urology.

[7]  T. Igarashi,et al.  Strategies for asymptomatic microscopic hematuria: a prospective study of 1,034 patients. , 1990, The Journal of urology.

[8]  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.

[9]  J. Orak,et al.  Use of a bleeding time determination in the evaluation of unexplained hematuria. , 1987, The Journal of urology.

[10]  S. Collier,et al.  Importance of occult haematuria found at screening. , 1986, British medical journal.

[11]  R. Babayan,et al.  Hematuria and the use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. , 1984, The Journal of urology.