چكيده لاتين :
Introduction: Our aim was to compare transabdominal ultrasonography (US) and intravenous urography (IVU) in the evaluation of patients with hematuria.
Materials and Methods: Two hundred patients with hematuria were assessed by US and lVU, and if needed, by cystoscopy, ureteroscopy, and CT scan, to determine the definite cause of hematuria. The results of US and lVU were compared according to the definite diagnoses.
Results: Of 97 patients with microscopic hematuria, 44 (45%) had a documented cause for hematuria, and of 103 patients with gross hematuria, 76 (74%) had a definite disorder (P < .001). Urinary calculi were found in 105 patients, 93 (88.5%) and 73 (69.5%) of which were detected by US and lVU, respectively (P < .001). There were 3
and 6 cases of kidney and bladder neoplasms, respectively, all of which were revealed by US, btlt only 2 renal tumors were detectable on lVU. Ultrasonography had a higher sensitivity than IVU for diagnoses of kidney calculi, lower ureteral calculi, and urologic neoplasms (95.3% versus 65.1% for kidney calculi, P = .039; 89.7% versus 69.2% for
lower ureteral calculi, P < .001; and 100% versus 22.3% for urologic neoplasms, P < .001), but in calculi of the middle and upper ureter and of the whole ureter, there were no differences between US and lVU.
Conclusion: Our results are in favor of using US in the initial evaluation of hematuria. However, we must choose our diagnostic tool according to the patientיs condition and suspected disorders causing hematuria.
