Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Hematuria secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) can occur due to a vascular primary gland itself or due to the vascular re-growth of the prostate following a transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). We aim to evaluate the clinical presentation and management in patients within both these groups. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively archived the data of 166 men diagnosed with hematuria secondary to BPH from our hematuria clinic database from March 2003 and March 2006. The 166 patients were divided into 2 groups: Group I (n = 94) hematuria with no previous TURP; Group II (n = 72) hematuria with previous TURP. The clinical management in both groups included reassurance, commencement of a 5-alpha reductase inhibitor (finasteride) or a primary TURP in Group I or re-do TURP in Group II. RESULTS: The median age was 73 years (range 45-94 years) for both groups. Outcomes combined for both groups included: reassurance alone in 26% (n = 43), finasteride in 51% (n = 84) and TURP in 12% (n = 19). Patients managed with reassurance alone or TURP had no further episodes of hematuria. At a mean follow-up was 18 months (range 7-22 months), 2 patients treated with finasteride re-bled but did require further intervention. A further 2 men elected to stop finasteride due to erectile dysfunction and gynecomastia respectively. CONCLUSION: BPH can present with hematuria. Following re-evaluation in a hematuria clinic, the lack of any subsequent cancer diagnosis in these patients suggests that repeat hematuria investigations should be carefully re-considered.