In your central box I would put:
That is the reason for the patient's admission and surgery. Hematuria and abdominal pain are symptoms that followed the treatment, aren't they? I had to find your other thread to see what else you had posted about this scenario. This is your kidney surgery patient, right? Where did you come up with the hematuria and abdominal pain? Were these symptoms that were listed in the scenario when it was given to you? Or, are they complications that you've discovered occur as a result of the surgery?
Keep in mind that the central box of the concept map is what holds everything together. The care map is like a wheel. The patient's admitting diagnosis is at the center. One way or another, all the patient's assessment data, nursing diagnoses, outcomes, and nursing interventions exist because of that "Chief Medical Diagnosis" and can be directly linked to it. Hematuria and abdominal pain sound like symptoms to me. However, if you had a statement in your scenario like this: This xx-year old patient was admitted to the hospital with possible carcinoma and was having hematuria and abdominal pain, then I would include them in the central box as well, but only if the scenario clearly makes it sound like the doctor has included them as part of the admitting diagnosis.
I explained in my previous post that Ms. Schuster's intent for the "Chief Medical Diagnosis" is the doctor's diagnosis at the time of admission to the hospital. The fact that the carcinoma was determined not to exist does not change what goes in your central box on the care map. Your only concern with this finding of the mass being benign is how is it affecting the nursing care of the patient. Those are things that will be addressed in the other boxes surrounding the "Chief Medical Diagnosis" box as a result of the patient's response to this news.