ArticleUrologic oncology2024
Cost of upper tract imaging obtained during hematuria evaluation: Analysis of a national claims database.
Article in Urologic oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Beyond the stone: nephrolithiasis as a metabolic sentinel in upper tract urothelial carcinoma and papillary renal cell carcinoma: toward a risk-stratified management framework.International urology and nephrology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionTo investigate the actual cost of hematuria evaluation using nationally representative claims data, given that the workup for hematuria burdens the healthcare system with significant associated costs. We hypothesized that evaluation with contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) confers more cost to hematuria evaluation than renal ultrasound (US).
methodsUsing a national, privately insured database (MarketScan), we identified all individuals with an incident diagnosis of hematuria. We included patients who underwent cystoscopy and upper tract imaging within 3 months of diagnosis. We tabulated the costs of the imaging study as well as the total healthcare cost per patient. A multivariable model was developed to evaluate patient factors associated with total healthcare costs.
resultsWe identified 318,680 patients with hematuria who underwent evaluation. Median costs associated with upper tract imaging were $362 overall, $504 for CT with contrast, $163 for US, $680 for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), $283 for CT without contrast, and $294 for retrograde pyelogram. Median cystoscopy cost was $283. Total healthcare costs per patient were highest when utilizing MRI and CT imaging. When adjusted for comorbidities, the use of any imaging other than ultrasound was associated with higher costs.
conclusionsIn this nationally representative analysis, hematuria evaluation confers a significant cost burden, while the primary factor associated with higher costs of screening was imaging type. Based upon reduced cost of US-based strategies, further investigation should delineate its cost-effectiveness in the diagnosis of urological disease.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.