......................

[C.Ann]

................................

 

[Kath2003]

Wait a week. I've had mine display traces of blood before and it turned out to be nothing. Wait one week and then get re-tested.

 

[kpm76]

I am a worrier so I would be having the test done. Yes, it might be nothing but I would want the full battery of tests done before accepting that conclusion. $100 is alot but definitiely worth it for peace of mind. Good luck

 

[C.Ann]

If it makes any difference, I'm past menopause, so "that" wouldn't be a contributing factor..

 

[DawnCt1]

Sometimes the prep to get a clean catch can cause irritation. I would wait a week and retest. As long as it isn't frank blood that you can see but a trace detected on a U/A.

 

[C.Ann]

..........................

 

[C.Ann]

...........................

 

[DawnCt1]

------------------

I kind of feel like they're going from zero to 90 with nothing in between - KWIM? Seems to me there might be something less invasive (and less expensive) - beyond the initial urine test - that might determine if the further (invasive/more expensive) testing was necessary..

It sounds like they want to do a cystoscopy, which would give the doc an inside look at the bladder or is he thinking about an IVP? There is not much in between a urinalysis and visual or xray examination. Ask if a sonogram would be useful?

 

[kpm76]

------------------

I kind of feel like they're going from zero to 90 with nothing in between - KWIM? Seems to me there might be something less invasive (and less expensive) - beyond the initial urine test - that might determine if the further (invasive/more expensive) testing was necessary..

Yeah, that's a good point. Maybe wait a week and re-test or see if there is another, less invasive and/or less expensive test.

 

[C.Ann]

..................

 

[crz4mm2]

A lot of women show some blood in a Clean Catch UA when menopausal and perimenopausal.......
I'd be pretty tempted to wait and retest. It IS just a trace.....

 

[Muushka]

I would wait also. I am actually surprised that the doc is not retesting before doing that procedure.

Good luck!

 

[C.Ann]

.......................

 

[Muushka]

Good deal. I wish I had a dollar for every urine that I tested that had a trace amount of blood. Not mine personally, but in the lab. I could probably buy the Magic Kingdom!

 

[ZuZugal]

I had this a few years ago. No pain or other symptoms of any kind. My doc thought it might be kidney stones. A CT scan was done and nothing was detected. So urologist decided to do a cystoscope (yikes!). Nothing detected with that test either. Then on Christmas eve, with 40 people in my house, I had a horrible back pain that got worse and worse (to the point of me vomiting.) Off to the ER we went. Another CT scan. Guess what? Kidney stones.

Of course, this might not be your case at all, just what happened to me.

 

[goofyernmost]

Not necessarily anything to worry about. I have had that problem for over 30 years. There is a name for it, but, it escapes me right now. My father had the problem, my daughter has it, my grandson has it. It is quite common, they tell me. I shouldn't have called it a problem because it really isn't one, unless you count the number of times you have to tell someone that it is a long term preexisting condition in your lifetime. That can get old quick.

I went through a series of tests to confirm that nothing else was wrong and that is probably a good idea. Like I said, 30 years and nothing serious has happened yet.

 

[FoundMyPrince]

Last summer, DS (5 at the time) had a 104 temp. I took him to the Urgent Care clinic. They took a urine sample and found a trace amount of blood (the dr said it was very strange for a young boy to have this). There was nothing else wrong with him - no ear infection, no redness of the throat, no nothing! The dr was concerned about a bladder infection. They ran a test and it came out clean. He was put on an antibiotic for 10 days. We never knew what was wrong with him and he was fine in a day or so.

 

[SHAYMARAYSMOM]

Went to the doctors for a totally unrelated problem and the routine urine test showed a "trace" of blood - not visible to the naked eye.. (I have no other symptoms of a urinary/kidney/bladder issue..) It was then cultured and there was no evidience of infection or anything of that nature..

Doctor ordered a special test (invasive - has to be preapproved by my insurance company) that carries a hefty out-of-pocket co-pay - $100.. The prep and the test itself are a hassle - and even more of a hassle because I'm still up here at the lake..

Now adult DD often has urine tests that come back with a "trace" of blood and after running her ragged - here, there, and everywhere - and performing all sorts of tests from minor to elaborate - they have never found a cause..

My late DH had also urine tests that came back with a "trace" of blood and they even went so far as to perform surgery - but were never able to identify the cause..

I'm leaning towards waiting a couple of weeks and re-testing - at which time I would have to make the decision to investigate the matter further or let it go (providing it did come back postive again)..

Given similar circumstances - and considering they never found the "cause" of this with my DH or my DD - what do you think you would do?

I won't make my decision based on your responses, but I'm curious to see what others might do..

I am not a DR but I play one on the dis.
So that being said. I would let your DR get things going for the procedure they want to do but have them retest you. Ask to use a differant lab also for the test.
If it still shows blood trace then they have things booked. If all is clear it is very easy to call of the procedure.

 

[janets]

Dh has had this happen. Apparently his dr. visit last year discovered this but no one ever called and told him or followed up with him, so when he went in this year for a totally unrelated issue, the dr questioned him and he said "what blood in my urine?"

Dr. did another urine test with the same results. Because dh's dad had kidney disease and even had a transplant, the dr. decided to do an u/s to rule out kidney stones (which is what he suspected it was). U/S was done and there was nothing. He never had fever, pain, any other symptoms.

Dr. said that since the tests revealed nothing and the kidney looked good, there was no reason to worry about it. Of course, I'd like to know why but I guess they are satisfied that it's nothing.

I would opt to wait for a retest and then ask about an u/s before an invasive test.

 

[Christine]

Both my mom and I have had "trace" or microscopic blood in the urine most of our lives. We have both gone through the various checks and always come out clean. My doctor said that some people just have this and it doesn't mean anything.

I would say get the tests though. If you've never had the blood noted before and this is a new thing, it's worth checking out.