Literature DB >> 17205220

Adequacy of urine cytology specimens: an assessment of collection techniques.

Andrew F Hundley1, Susan Maygarden, Jennifer M Wu, Anthony G Visco, AnnaMarie Connolly.   

Abstract

The objective of this study was to determine whether the method of urine collection impacts the adequacy and cell counts of cytology specimens in a low-risk population. Voided, post-cystometrogram (CMG), and bladder irrigant specimens were collected and evaluated for cytologic adequacy and average cell count by a single cytopathologist masked to the source of each sample. Data were analyzed to detect differences in specimen adequacy and cell counts based on method of collection. Both the voided and post-CMG specimens (97.3%, 93.7% respectively) were significantly more likely to be adequate compared to the bladder irrigant specimen (11.7%, p < 0.0001). The spontaneously voided specimen (211.4 +/- 100.1) had significantly higher cell counts than both the post-CMG specimen (85.9 +/- 86.6) and the cystoscopy specimen (6.4 +/- 19.6, p < 0.0001). In a multivariate linear model, collection method and specimen adequacy were associated with increased cell count/hpf (p < 0.001), as was the presence of hematuria on urine dipstick (p = 0.03). No cytologic abnormalities were diagnosed. Whereas both spontaneously voided and post-CMG specimens were consistently adequate for interpretation, spontaneous voided specimens were optimal with regard to maximizing cell count/hpf.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17205220     DOI: 10.1007/s00192-006-0277-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct


  17 in total

1.  Current practice of urinary bladder cytology.

Authors:  W J Frable; L Paxson; J A Barksdale; W W Koontz
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  1977-08       Impact factor: 12.701

2.  Exfoliative cytology in urine.

Authors:  S Y Tsai; V C Laughlin; E Goodsitt; A Basa
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1968-03       Impact factor: 7.450

3.  Comparison of bladder washings and urine cytology in the diagnosis of bladder cancer.

Authors:  P A Trott; L Edwards
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1973-12       Impact factor: 7.450

4.  The diagnostic value of urine versus bladder washing in patients with bladder cancer.

Authors:  W M Murphy; W N Crabtree; A F Jukkola; M S Soloway
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1981-09       Impact factor: 7.450

5.  Value of urinary cytology in women presenting with urge incontinence and/or irritative voiding symptoms.

Authors:  K E Duldulao; A C Diokno; B Mitchell
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 7.450

Review 6.  The 2001 Bethesda System: terminology for reporting results of cervical cytology.

Authors:  Diane Solomon; Diane Davey; Robert Kurman; Ann Moriarty; Dennis O'Connor; Marianne Prey; Stephen Raab; Mark Sherman; David Wilbur; Thomas Wright; Nancy Young
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2002-04-24       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  From Papanicolaou to Bethesda: the rationale for a new cervical cytologic classification.

Authors:  R J Kurman; G D Malkasian; A Sedlis; D Solomon
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1991-05       Impact factor: 7.661

8.  Evaluation of bladder washing cytology for bladder cancer surveillance.

Authors:  M J Flanagan; A Miller
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1978-01       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  Urinary cytology and bladder cancer. The cellular features of transitional cell neoplasms.

Authors:  W M Murphy; M S Soloway; A F Jukkola; W N Crabtree; K S Ford
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1984-04-01       Impact factor: 6.860

10.  Diagnostic value of cytology of voided urine.

Authors:  L G Koss; D Deitch; R Ramanathan; A B Sherman
Journal:  Acta Cytol       Date:  1985 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.319

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.