You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 147 No. 3, March 1987 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  ORIGINAL INVESTIGATIONS
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (25)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

'Idiopathic' Hematuria

A Prospective Evaluation

LTC John B. Copley, MC, USA; MAJ James A. Hasbargen, MC, USA

Arch Intern Med. 1987;147(3):434-437.


Abstract

• Evaluation of the patient with isolated hematuria is often problematic. Sixty-five patients with this entity were studied prospectively with renal biopsy; serum IgA levels, skin biopsy for IgA immunofluorescence, and HLA typing were also studied in most patients. Previously, all patients had had a noncontributory history and physical examination, normal results of structural evaluation, serologic and clotting studies, and proteinuria of less than 1000 mg/d (<1 g/d). Seventy-eight percent were found to have abnormal renal biopsy results and were divisible into two patient groups: those with IgA nephropathy (49%, 32/65) and those with multiple nonspecific abnormalities (29%, 19/65). Ancillary testing, demographic data, and clinical data, other than abnormal amounts of proteinuria, were not distinguishable between these groups and patients with normal renal biopsy results (22%, 14/65). Etiologic differentiation of the hematuria was possible only by renal biopsy. At present, renal biopsy in this group of patients makes no difference therapeutically or, probably, prognostically. It should not, therefore, be considered necessary for routine management of asymptomatic hematuria.

(Arch Intern Med 1987;147:434-437)



Author Affiliations

From the Nephrology Service, Department of Medicine, Brooke Army Medical Center, Fort Sam Houston, Tex (Dr Copley), and the Nephrology Service, Department of Medicine, Fitzsimons Army Medical Center, Aurora, Colo (Dr Hasbargen).


Footnotes

Accepted for publication Aug 21, 1986.

Read in part at the 16th annual meeting of the American Society of Nephrology, Washington, DC, Dec 4, 1983.

The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the US Army or the Department of Defense.

Reprint requests to Nephrology Service (HSHE-MDN), Department of Medicine, Brooke Army Medical Center, Fort Sam Houston, TX 78234-6200 (Dr Copley).



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Evaluation of Hematuria in Adults
Sutton
JAMA 1990;263:2475-2480.
ABSTRACT  

Dipstick Urinalysis Screening of Asymptomatic Adults for Urinary Tract Disorders: I. Hematuria and Proteinuria
Woolhandler et al.
JAMA 1989;262:1214-1219.
ABSTRACT  

Establishing the Diagnosis of Benign Familial Hematuria: The Importance of Examining the Urine Sediment of Family Members
Blumenthal et al.
JAMA 1988;259:2263-2266.
ABSTRACT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1987 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.