Pitfalls in radiologic and histopathologic diagnosis of urologic disease--report of 4 cases.

Cases are presented to illustrate pitfalls in radiologic and histopathologic diagnosis in urology. In a 73-year-old woman, ultrasound revealed calcification in an irregular mass arising from the left wall of the bladder. Bladder biopsy reported the mass as papillary transitional cell carcinoma. Histologically, the specimen showed marked hyperplasia of the urothelium with formation of Brunn's nests and no evidence of dysplasia or malignancy. A review of medical images showed that the mass was a calcified uterine fibroid. In a 36-year-old man, a calcified opacity in the pelvis was reported as a ureteric calculus, and the patient underwent ureteroscopy. No stone was found. A review of an intravenous urogram showed that the radio-opaque shadow appeared outside the left ureter. A 41-year-old man with tetraplegia developed hydronephrosis as the result of a calculus in the renal pelvis. Ureteric stenting was performed, followed by shock wave lithotripsy. A follow-up x-ray of the abdomen showed a small radioopacity that projected over the line of the left ureter at the L-3 level-probably a ureteric calculus. A review of a computed tomography scan revealed that the calculus, noted on plain film at the level of L-3, had become extruded and was lying posterior to the ureter. A 59-year-old man underwent nephrectomy for a 5-cm solid lesion in the mid pole of the left kidney. Histology showed multiple synchronous renal cell carcinomas and angiomyolipomas. The patient underwent further investigation for von Hippel-Lindau disease and tuberous sclerosis. A review of tissue blocks from the nephrectomy specimen, however, showed no evidence of angiomyolipoma. What was interpreted as renal angiomyolipoma was actually simple distorted blood vessels in areas of renal scarring. To prevent mistakes in diagnosis and to detect medical errors without delay, the authors recommend that physicians set aside time to reflect upon their clinical practice, regularly participate in honest and informal case discussions, and seek a second opinion when in doubt.