As Alan said, there can be a gazillion reasons for microscopic blood in the urine. And in many cases a cause is never discovered. AND urine cytology tests are notorious for coming up with false positive results. That is why they are just an indicator that something should be watched, but are not used alone for diagnosis.
I would disagree slightly with my friends here. I think your urologist's opinion that there is probably nothing to worry about is a good one. He IS going to re-do the exam in 6 months. He did cystoscopy and did not see a thing. The problem with the type of CT scan that would be used is that it hits the patient with a high load of radiation which, in itself, can cause problems.
You are very fortunate that you were referred to a urologist. Females of your age with microscopic urinary blood are too often just ignored. His approach, to me, is a very logical and appropriate one. I know that you cannot help but be worried but it seems as if you are in good hands. Other than a very high dose CT scan with and without contrast (really two CT scans) there are really not any other good diagnostic tests. And the urologist IS watching you. Of course if you have any other symptoms or issues you call him.
You will do fine
Diagnosis 2-08 Small papillary TCC; CIS
BCG; BCG maintenance
Vice-President, American Bladder Cancer Society
The following user(s) said Thank You: JIMG4, Robyn123
Robyn, sorry to hear that you're dealing with medical issues. I will re-iterate Alan's words, microscopic hematuria (and gross hematuria) can be a result of many different things. So first thing, breath. Next again with re-iterating Alan's words, I too would be concerned.
I'm not a doctor but for me, after my experiences, I would be obtaining a second opinion. That's just me. Like Alan suggested, antennas up. You are in control of your body. And so if it takes you a second opinion to gain that additional comfort then that's your choice and your right to do that. No one should diminish your need to gain the information necessary to achieve comfort, confidence .....and assurance.
I think 6 months is a long wait. I'm sure the doctor feels this is reasonable, but again you're in charge and if you think that's too long for you then discuss that issue with your doctor as well.
Prayers that you find answers. And more prayers that the answers you receive are not related to cancer. Be strong!
Keep us updated!
11/06/18: DX Ta - low grade non-invasive TCC
07/07/20: Recurrence. TURBT (in proc)
1 year 7 months ago - 1 year 7 months ago#56213by Alan
Welcome. Microscopic hematuria can have many causes and for a few none is ever found. Atypical cells might also may mean nothing. I even had a cytology with "atypical" cells a few years back and my GP panicked and my URO saw the report and said it is nothing...which it was, nothing.
With hematuria AND atypical cells I would still have my antenna up! Did your doc do a CT scan? I presume you were checked for an infection via the blood showing up? Reading the whole urinary tract including the kidneys would seem to be needed. None of us are doctors so take these forums for what they are worth. As you mentioned a second opinion might even be called for and 6 months is simply too long of a wait. A set of fresh eyes and peace of mind.
As you go if you have more questions someone should see your thread.
DX 5/6/2008 TAG3 papillary tumor .5 CM in size. 2 TURBS followed by 6 instillations of BCG weekly with a second round of 6 after a 6 week wait.
Hi all! I’m a 36 year old female, former pack a day smoker but quit about 10 years ago. After 3 consecutive urinalysises with microscopic hematuria, I was sent to a urologist. The microscopic hematuria was present again and the cystoscope results were normal however the urine came back today with atypical cells, without suspicion for malignancy. He wants me to come in and repeat all testing in 6 months. Of course I thought of a million questions after the doctor and I hung up the phone and I’m wondering if you can help shed some light.
Does this place me at high risk to develop a malignancy?
I prefer more aggressive screening vs “wait and see”... is requesting additional testing at this stage reasonable though? Or should I be getting a second opinion?
He said not to worry and the results were good news but I can’t shake the worry and would appreciate some feedback.