Literature DB >> 19820939

[Cytology of the urinary tract: Between uncertainty and clarity].

L Bubendorf1, P Dalquen, S Savic.   

Abstract

Reliable detection of poorly differentiated urothelial carcinoma and the detection of carcinoma in situ, which is often invisible by cystoscopy, are the undisputed strength of urinary cytology. In contrast, well-differentiated urothelial tumors are often missed by cytology. We suggest the following classification: negative, questionable, suspicious, and positive. Due to the complex clinico-pathological associations, the classification should always be accompanied by an appropriate commentary. The WHO 2004 classification separates the clinically less important low-grade tumors from the clinically relevant high-grade tumors, usually classified as "positive" by cytology. A cytological diagnosis of low-grade tumors by cytology is of minor clinical importance. Most urothelial neoplasias are characterized by chromosomal aberrations. This makes multi-target fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) assay suitable for the clarification of non-definitive cytology. In contrast, positive cytology does not need further confirmation by FISH analysis. Standardized diagnosis and the possibility for supplementary analyses increase the diagnostic value of urinary cytology.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19820939     DOI: 10.1007/s00292-009-1190-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pathologe        ISSN: 0172-8113            Impact factor:   1.011


  22 in total

1.  Compassionate conservatism in urinary cytology.

Authors:  A A Renshaw
Journal:  Diagn Cytopathol       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 1.582

2.  Superficial urothelial (umbrella) cells. A potential cause of abnormal DNA ploidy results in urine specimens.

Authors:  E M Wojcik; R J Brownlie; T J Bassler; M C Miller
Journal:  Anal Quant Cytol Histol       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 0.302

3.  Multiprobe FISH for enhanced detection of bladder cancer in voided urine specimens and bladder washings.

Authors:  L Bubendorf; B Grilli; G Sauter; M J Mihatsch; T C Gasser; P Dalquen
Journal:  Am J Clin Pathol       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 2.493

4.  Multi-target fluorescence in situ hybridization in bladder washings for prediction of recurrent bladder cancer.

Authors:  Tobias Zellweger; Gabriel Benz; Gieri Cathomas; Michael J Mihatsch; Tullio Sulser; Thomas C Gasser; Lukas Bubendorf
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2006-10-01       Impact factor: 7.396

5.  Cost efficiency analysis of modern cytocentrifugation methods versus liquid based (Cytyc Thinprep) processing of urinary samples.

Authors:  E Piaton; K Hutin; J Faÿnel; M-C Ranchin; M Cottier
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 3.411

6.  DNA tetraploidy in Feulgen-stained bladder washings assessed by image cytometry.

Authors:  M J Kline; E J Wilkinson; R Askeland; R W Given; C Stephen; J B Hendricks
Journal:  Anal Quant Cytol Histol       Date:  1995-04       Impact factor: 0.302

7.  Assessing the value of reflex fluorescence in situ hybridization testing in the diagnosis of bladder cancer when routine urine cytological examination is equivocal.

Authors:  Benjamin R Kipp; Kevin C Halling; Michael B Campion; Amy J Wendel; R Jeffrey Karnes; Jun Zhang; Thomas J Sebo
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2008-03-04       Impact factor: 7.450

8.  The effects of the current World Health Organization/International Society of Urologic Pathologists bladder neoplasm classification system on urine cytology results.

Authors:  Jonathan L Curry; Eva M Wojcik
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2002-06-25       Impact factor: 6.860

9.  [Fluorescence in situ hybridization. A new diagnostic dimension in cytology].

Authors:  S Savic; L Bubendorf
Journal:  Pathologe       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 0.973

10.  Conventional liquid-based techniques versus Cytyc Thinprep processing of urinary samples: a qualitative approach.

Authors:  Eric Piaton; Jacqueline Faÿnel; Karine Hutin; Marie-Claude Ranchin; Michèle Cottier
Journal:  BMC Clin Pathol       Date:  2005-10-06
View more
  5 in total

Review 1.  [Urine cytology - update 2013. A systematic review of recent literature].

Authors:  M Böhm; F vom Dorp; M Schostak; O W Hakenberg
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 0.639

2.  [Non-invasive and invasive urothelial tumours: special challenges in uropathological diagnostics].

Authors:  N T Gaisa; K Lindemann-Docter
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 0.639

3.  [Urine markers with special regard to fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH)].

Authors:  K Lindemann-Docter; N T Gaisa; D Smeets; R Knüchel-Clarke
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 0.639

4.  [The Paris system for classification of urinary cytology].

Authors:  S Savic; T Vlajnic; L Bubendorf
Journal:  Pathologe       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 1.011

Review 5.  [Cytology in uropathological diagnostics].

Authors:  N T Gaisa; K Lindemann-Docter
Journal:  Pathologe       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 1.011

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.