Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 9, 2026

Using 2-Photon Microscopy to Quantify the Effects of Chronic Unilateral Ureteral Obstruction on Glomerular Processes
Published on: March 4, 2022
Evaluation of the 2020 American Urological Association Microscopic Hematuria Guidelines in Clinical Practice:
Dominique Munroe1, James O'Keefe2, Danyang Wang2
1Department of Family Medicine, Atrium Health Navicent, 777 Hemlock St, Macon, GA, 31201, United States, 1 4705109235.
Insights
The American Urological Association (AUA) risk stratification system effectively categorizes hematuria patients. Low-risk individuals, particularly "well adults," often show no urologic diagnosis, aligning with AUA guidelines.
Area of Science:
- Urology
- Clinical Decision-Making
Background:
- Hematuria is a common urologic condition with a wide prevalence range.
- The 2020 American Urological Association (AUA) guidelines stratify patients into low, intermediate, and high risk.
- These guidelines show high clinical utility but require validation in "well adult" populations.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the utility of risk stratification for clinical decision-making in hematuria patients.
- To assess the effectiveness of the AUA risk stratification system in a real-world clinical setting.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective study design using electronic medical records from Emory Healthcare Executive Health Clinic (September 2017 - January 2021).
- Patients stratified into low-risk and intermediate/high-risk groups based on AUA criteria (sex, age, smoking history, gross hematuria, RBC/HPF).
- Frequencies and causes of hematuria analyzed across risk strata.
Main Results:
- Instances with fewer than 3 red blood cells/high-powered field (URBC <3) were more likely to have no urologic diagnosis (91.48%) compared to those with URBC ≥3 (76.27%).
- All participants (100%) in the low-risk group had no urologic diagnosis post-urinalysis.
- In contrast, 75.62% of participants in the intermediate/high-risk group (N=804) received a urologic diagnosis.
Conclusions:
- Emphasizes the need for focused monitoring of elevated URBC counts in low-risk patients per AUA guidelines.
- Recommends future research on risk stratification's impact on clinical decisions, access to care (especially in underserved populations), physician referral patterns, and implementation challenges.
Background:
Hematuria is one of the most common urologic diseases seen within clinical practice, with a prevalence range of 1.7%-31.1%. In 2020, American Urological Association (AUA) guidelines were revised and recommend that following initial evaluation, clinicians should categorize patients into three tiers (low risk, intermediate risk, and high risk) based on various factors. Recent literature has shown that the AUA guidelines have high clinical utility when compared to other international guidelines such as those outlined by the Hematuria Risk Index, Canadian Urological Association, and Kaiser Permanente; however, this guideline remains unvalidated among the population of "well adults" within the United States.
Objective:
We used a retrospective study design to evaluate data abstracted from the electronic medical records of patients seen in the Emory Healthcare Executive Health Clinic from September 29, 2017, to January 29, 2021, to investigate the utility of risk stratification as a tool for clinical decision-making.
Methods:
According to the AUA risk stratification system, patients were stratified into low-risk and intermediate-risk/high-risk groups based on sex, age, smoking history, history of gross hematuria, and red blood cells/high-powered field. The frequencies and percentages of different causes of hematuria across the three risk strata were reported.
Results:
Of the 882 instances of red blood cells in urine (URBC) ≥3, a total of 368 (41.72%) underwent a repeat analysis within a 6-month time span, 184 (20.86%) within a 12-month time span, and 330 (37.41%) at >12 months. Instances of a URBC <3 (N=1643) were more likely to have no urologic diagnosis-1503 (91.48%) in comparison to 633 (76.27%) for those instances with a URBC >3 (N=830). Ultimately, 23 (100%) participants in the low-risk group had no urologic diagnosis after urinalysis versus 608 (75.62%) in the intermediate-risk/high-risk group (N=804).
Conclusions:
We found a need for a greater focus on monitoring elevated URBC counts, in accordance with clinical guidelines for managing hematuria in low-risk patients. Future research should examine the impact of risk stratification on clinical decisions and access to care, especially in underserved populations. It should also assess how the new AUA guidelines affect physician referral patterns and explore real-world implementation challenges and facilitators.
More Related Videos
06:39Technical Modification of the Terminal Ureter During Total Transperitoneal Laparoscopic Nephroureterectomy for Upper Urinary Tract Urothelial Carcinoma
Published on: November 22, 2019
05:25Ultrasonography of the Adult Male Urinary Tract for Urinary Functional Testing
Published on: August 14, 2019
Related Concept Videos
Urologic Endoscopic Procedure: Cystoscopic Examination
Urinary Tract Infection III: Diagnostic Studies and Interprofessional Care
Imaging Studies V: Intravenous Urography and Retrograde Pyelography
Urinary Tract Calculi III: Medical Management
Acute Pyelonephritis II: Diagnostic Studies and Management
Urine Studies I: Urinalysis