Hematuria is one of the most common reasons a patient reaches urology, and it is where the highest-stakes misses happen. Your job is to separate benign causes from malignancy and other serious pathology, and to work patients up according to current…
27 pathway steps3 pathways1 local-policy steps
Your learning progress0 of 31 chapters complete
Saved privately in this browser and shared across state tabs.
Didactics
Shared across all locations
Hematuria is one
of the most common reasons a patient reaches urology, and it is where
the highest-stakes misses happen. Your job is to separate benign
causes from malignancy and other serious pathology, and to work
patients up according to current AUA/SUFU guidance. The 2025 AUA/SUFU
microhematuria update refined risk stratification to reduce
unnecessary invasive testing in low-risk patients while preserving
cancer detection in those who need it.
3.1 Define the bleeding
Gross
hematuria: visible blood in the urine. Painless gross hematuria
is a malignancy until proven otherwise and ALWAYS warrants a full
evaluation — cystoscopy plus upper-tract imaging — regardless of
age, sex, or anticoagulant use.
Microscopic
hematuria (microhematuria): ≥ 3 RBCs per high-power field on a
properly collected, centrifuged microscopic urinalysis. A positive
dipstick alone is NOT sufficient and does not constitute
microhematuria — confirm with microscopy.
Timing
within the stream (a useful, underused clue): initial hematuria
suggests a urethral source; terminal hematuria suggests the bladder
neck or prostate; total (throughout the stream) hematuria suggests
the bladder or upper tracts.
Do not be fooled
Confirm true hematuria with
microscopy before an extensive work-up — dipsticks react to
myoglobin and free hemoglobin as well as RBCs.
Consider mimics of red/brown
urine: myoglobinuria (rhabdomyolysis), hemoglobinuria
(hemolysis), beets, rifampin, phenazopyridine, senna, and
menstrual contamination (recollect after menses).
If there is proteinuria,
dysmorphic RBCs, red-cell casts, or a rising creatinine — think
glomerular disease and involve nephrology. That patient's problem
is medical, not surgical.
Exercise-induced and post-catheterization hematuria are
real; repeat the UA after a period of rest before launching a
work-up in an otherwise low-risk patient.
The updated
guideline stratifies patients into three tiers based on age, sex,
smoking history, degree of hematuria, and other risk factors. Risk
category determines how aggressively to evaluate — this is the
framework to know and use.
Risk tier
Representative profile
Recommended evaluation
Low / negligible
Younger patient (e.g., woman < 50 / man < 40), never or
minimal smoking, 3–10 RBCs/HPF, no other risk factors
Shared decision-making: either repeat the urinalysis in 6 months
OR proceed with cystoscopy + renal ultrasound
Cystoscopy + renal ultrasound. Cytology or a validated urine
tumor marker may inform the decision about cystoscopy
High
Age ≥ 60, > 30 pack-years, > 25 RBCs/HPF, or any prior
gross hematuria
Cystoscopy + CT urography (upper-tract imaging of choice)
Validation
context — in a large validation cohort, urinary-tract cancer
detection was roughly 0.4% (low), 1.0% (intermediate), and 2.6%
(high) risk — supporting a lighter footprint for low-risk patients
and a thorough evaluation for high-risk ones.
3.3 Risk factors that push a patient toward more
evaluation
Older age
and male sex.
Tobacco
use (current or past) — the dominant modifiable risk factor
for urothelial cancer. Quantify it in pack-years and document it; it
directly changes the risk tier.
Degree/quantity
of hematuria, and any prior episode of GROSS hematuria (which
automatically elevates risk).
Occupational
or chemical exposure to aromatic amines — dyes, rubber, leather,
printing, petrochemicals, painting. Ask about the patient's whole
work history, not just their current job. Latency can be decades.
Irritative
voiding symptoms (may signal carcinoma in situ), chronic indwelling
catheter, prior pelvic radiation, cyclophosphamide exposure, chronic
UTIs, and a history of any urothelial cancer.
Analgesic
abuse and aristolochic acid exposure (upper-tract urothelial
carcinoma).
3.4 The gross hematuria work-up
Confirm
and characterize: timing within the stream, presence of clots (clots
essentially exclude a glomerular source and point to a urologic
one), pain, associated symptoms, and anticoagulation.
Labs:
urinalysis with microscopy, urine culture (treat and re-check if
infected), CBC, renal function, and coagulation studies if bleeding
is significant.
Upper-tract
imaging: CT urography — a multiphase study (non-contrast +
nephrographic + excretory/delayed phases). It is the best test for
stones, renal masses, and upper-tract urothelial disease. Use renal
ultrasound or MR urography when contrast/CT is contraindicated
(renal insufficiency, contrast allergy, pregnancy).
Lower tract:
cystoscopy to directly inspect the urethra and the entire bladder
mucosa. Imaging does not replace cystoscopy — a flat CIS lesion is
invisible on CT. Note that when cystoscopy is performed in the ASC
under anesthesia, it is typically done together with bilateral
retrograde pyelograms to evaluate the upper tracts in the same
setting.
Cytology:
consider urine cytology, particularly with irritative symptoms or
high risk. It is most sensitive for high-grade urothelial carcinoma
and carcinoma in situ, and poorly sensitive for low-grade tumors.
If
everything is negative: for high-risk patients, repeat urinalysis
annually; recurrent or persistent hematuria warrants repeat
evaluation.
Clinical pearls
Anticoagulation does not
“explain away” hematuria. Patients on blood thinners with
gross or confirmed microscopic hematuria still deserve a full
evaluation — anticoagulants unmask underlying pathology rather
than cause it. A normal INR is not reassurance.
A negative cystoscopy does
not end the story. Upper-tract imaging is a separate obligation —
an upper-tract urothelial carcinoma or a renal mass will be
missed by cystoscopy alone.
Do not attribute hematuria to BPH until the malignancy
work-up is complete. Prostatic bleeding is a diagnosis of
exclusion (though it responds well to a 5-ARI — Chapter 2).
Clinical Pathway
Click any node to expand
Hematuria is one of the most common reasons a patient reaches urology, and it is where the highest-stakes misses happen. Your job is to separate benign causes from malignancy, and to work patients up according to current AUA/SUFU guidance — the 2025 microhematuria update refined risk stratification to reduce unnecessary invasive testing in low-risk patients while preserving cancer detection in those who need it. Start with the first track to confirm what you are actually dealing with, then take the gross or microscopic branch.
Confirm the bleeding is real, decide whether it is gross or microscopic, and rule out the mimics before you build a work-up.
Select a box to open its teaching details.
Why this comes first
The entire downstream work-up — cystoscopy, CT urography, cytology — depends on which category the patient falls into. Getting the category wrong either over-tests a low-risk patient or misses a cancer.
Ch 3.1
Time-critical
The rule
It ALWAYS warrants a full evaluation — cystoscopy plus upper-tract imaging
Regardless of age, sex, or anticoagulant use
Where to go next
Take the Gross hematuria work-up track.
Ch 3.1
The threshold
≥ 3 RBCs/HPF on microscopy
Pitfalls
A positive dipstick alone is NOT sufficient and does not constitute microhematuria. Confirm with microscopy.
Dipsticks react to myoglobin and free hemoglobin as well as RBCs.
Where to go next
Take the Microhematuria track to assign a risk tier.
Ch 3.1
Timing within the stream
Initial hematuria — suggests a urethral source
Terminal hematuria — suggests the bladder neck or prostate
Total (throughout the stream) — suggests the bladder or upper tracts
Ch 3.1
Mimics of red/brown urine
Myoglobinuria (rhabdomyolysis)
Hemoglobinuria (hemolysis)
Beets
Rifampin
Phenazopyridine
Senna
Menstrual contamination — recollect after menses
Ch 3.1 — do not be fooled
What to do
In an otherwise low-risk patient, repeat the urinalysis after a period of rest before launching a work-up.
Pitfalls
This is not a licence to defer a high-risk patient. "He went for a run" does not explain hematuria in a 65-year-old smoker.
Ch 3.1 — do not be fooled
Findings that redirect the patient
Proteinuria
Dysmorphic RBCs
Red-cell casts
A rising creatinine
What to do
Think glomerular disease and involve nephrology. Do not proceed down the cystoscopy / CT urography pathway on these findings alone.
Ch 3.1 — do not be fooled
Interpretation
The presence of clots essentially excludes a glomerular source and points to a urologic one.
If the clots are obstructing
Clot retention is an emergency in its own right — large-bore three-way catheter, manual irrigation, CBI, and start a 5-ARI immediately (Ch 2.6).
Ch 3.4
AUA/SUFU 2025 risk stratification — the framework to know and use. Risk category determines how aggressively to evaluate.
Select a box to open its teaching details.
The framework
The updated guideline stratifies patients into three tiers based on age, sex, smoking history, degree of hematuria, and other risk factors.
Why it changed
The 2025 update refined risk stratification to reduce unnecessary invasive testing in low-risk patients while preserving cancer detection in those who need it.
Ch 3.2
Why the number matters
Tobacco use — current or past — directly changes the risk tier. "Some smoking" is not a data point; 10-30 pack-years and > 30 pack-years are.
Ch 3.3
Occupational / chemical exposures to ask about
Dyes
Rubber
Leather
Printing
Petrochemicals
Painting
Pitfalls
Asking only "what do you do?" misses the exposure. Ask what they have ever done.
Ch 3.3
Push toward more evaluation
Older age and male sex
Degree / quantity of hematuria
Any prior episode of GROSS hematuria — this automatically elevates risk
Irritative voiding symptoms — may signal carcinoma in situ
Chronic indwelling catheter
Prior pelvic radiation
Cyclophosphamide exposure
Chronic UTIs
A history of any urothelial cancer
Analgesic abuse and aristolochic acid exposure — upper-tract urothelial carcinoma
Ch 3.3
Assign the risk tier — it determines the evaluation
Representative profile
Woman < 50 / man < 40
Never or minimal smoking
3-10 RBCs/HPF
No other risk factors
Recommended evaluation
Shared decision-making: either repeat the urinalysis in 6 months OR proceed with cystoscopy + renal ultrasound
What the risk actually is
In a large validation cohort, urinary-tract cancer detection in this tier was roughly 0.4%.
Ch 3.2
Representative profile
Woman 50-59 / man 40-59
10-30 pack-years
11-25 RBCs/HPF
Recommended evaluation
Cystoscopy + renal ultrasound
Cytology or a validated urine tumor marker may inform the decision about cystoscopy
What the risk actually is
Urinary-tract cancer detection in this tier was roughly 1.0%.
Ch 3.2
Representative profile
Age ≥ 60
> 30 pack-years
> 25 RBCs/HPF
Any prior gross hematuria
Recommended evaluation
Cystoscopy + CT urography — upper-tract imaging of choice
What the risk actually is
Urinary-tract cancer detection in this tier was roughly 2.6% — which is why the evaluation is thorough.
Ch 3.2
How to say it
"In people with your profile, about 4 in 1,000 turn out to have a urinary-tract cancer. That is why we can reasonably choose between rechecking the urine in six months and looking with a camera now — and it is your call which we do."
Why it exists
These figures support a lighter footprint for low-risk patients and a thorough evaluation for high-risk ones.
Ch 3.2 — validation context
Follow-up
For high-risk patients, repeat the urinalysis annually
Recurrent or persistent hematuria warrants repeat evaluation
Ch 3.4
Pitfalls
Anticoagulation does not "explain away" hematuria. Patients on blood thinners still deserve a full evaluation — anticoagulants unmask underlying pathology rather than cause it. A normal INR is not reassurance.
A negative cystoscopy does not end the story. Upper-tract imaging is a separate obligation — an upper-tract urothelial carcinoma or a renal mass will be missed by cystoscopy alone.
Do not attribute hematuria to BPH until the malignancy work-up is complete. Prostatic bleeding is a diagnosis of exclusion — though it responds well to a 5-ARI (Ch 2).
Ch 3.4 — clinical pearls
Visible blood always gets the full evaluation — cystoscopy plus upper-tract imaging — regardless of age, sex, or anticoagulant use.
Select a box to open its teaching details.
No exemptions
Regardless of age
Regardless of sex
Regardless of anticoagulant use
Ch 3.1
Characterize
Timing within the stream — initial (urethral), terminal (bladder neck/prostate), total (bladder or upper tracts)
Presence of clots — clots essentially exclude a glomerular source and point to a urologic one
Pain
Associated symptoms — irritative symptoms may signal CIS
Anticoagulation
Ch 3.4
Orders
Urinalysis with microscopy
Urine culture — treat and re-check if infected
CBC
Renal function
Coagulation studies if bleeding is significant
Ch 3.4
Upper-tract imaging — which study?
The phases you must have
Non-contrast
Nephrographic
Excretory / delayed
Pitfalls
A routine contrast CT abdomen/pelvis is not a CT urogram. Specify the multiphase protocol on the order.
Ch 3.4
Use when
Renal insufficiency
Contrast allergy
Pregnancy
In-house
We have ultrasound (renal, scrotal, penile) at every location — the renal ultrasound never needs to leave the practice.
Ch 3.4
Why it is non-negotiable
A flat CIS lesion is invisible on CT. Imaging does not replace cystoscopy, and cystoscopy does not replace imaging — you owe the patient both.
Ch 3.4
Local policy
Our practice
When cystoscopy is performed in the ASC under anesthesia, it is typically done together with bilateral retrograde pyelograms to evaluate the upper tracts in the same setting.
Why it helps you
One anesthetic, both tracts evaluated — worth mentioning when you counsel a patient who is dreading a staged work-up.
Ch 3.4
Performance
Most sensitive for high-grade urothelial carcinoma and carcinoma in situ
Poorly sensitive for low-grade tumors
Pitfalls
A negative cytology does not exclude a low-grade papillary tumor — that is what the cystoscopy is for.
Ch 3.4
Follow-up
High-risk patients — repeat urinalysis annually
Recurrent or persistent hematuria warrants repeat evaluation
Pitfalls
Do not attribute hematuria to BPH until the malignancy work-up is complete. Prostatic bleeding is a diagnosis of exclusion — though it responds well to a 5-ARI (Ch 2.6).
Anticoagulation does not explain it away.
A negative cystoscopy does not end the story — the upper tract is a separate obligation.