Advertisement

Urine Cytology

  • Nikolina Dioufa
  • Gina Prochilo
  • Suad TaraifEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Practical Anatomic Pathology book series (PAP)

Abstract

Urine cytology remains the single most practical tool to detect and follow up bladder carcinoma, especially for high-grade urothelial carcinoma. The introduction and continued acceptance of the Paris System for Reporting Urinary Cytology will certainly improve the sensitivity and specificity of urine cytology for high-grade urothelial carcinoma diagnosis. In this chapter, we start with questions about urine cytology commonly encountered in cytology practice: from specimen preparation to recognizing the cellular and noncellular components of urine specimens in voided, instrumented, and loop urine samples. We then move on to describe benign reactive changes of urothelial cells, low-grade urothelial neoplasms, and high-grade urothelial carcinomas; common urothelial carcinoma mimics like “decoy” cells and metastatic urinary tract carcinomas are also discussed. The case presentation at the end of the chapter will further emphasize the key concepts and diagnostic points.

Keywords

Urine cytology Paris System for Reporting Urinary Cytology Urothelial carcinoma Polyoma virus Specimen preparation 

References

  1. 1.
    Cibas ES, Ducatman BS. Cytology: diagnostic principles and clinical correlates. 4th ed. Philadelphia: Saunders/Elsevier; 2014.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jensen CS, Cohen MB. Chapter 6: Urinary tract cytopathology. In: Atlas of diagnostic cytopathology. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Saunders; 2004. p. 232–71.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Thiryayi SA, Rana DN. Urine cytopathology: challenges, pitfalls, and mimics. Diagn Cytopathol. 2012;40(11):1019–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
  5. 5.
    Hundley AF, Maygarden S, Wu JM, Visco AG, Connolly A. Adequacy of urine cytology specimens: an assessment of collection techniques. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2007;18(9):997–1001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Prather J, Arville B, Chatt G, et al. Evidence-based adequacy criteria for urinary bladder barbotage cytology. J Am Soc Cytopathol. 2015;4:57–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Barkan GA. Enough is enough: adequacy of voided urine cytology. Cancer Cytopathol. 2016;124(3):163–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Vanden Bussche CJ, Rosenthal DL, Olson MT. Adequacy in voided urine cytology specimens: the role of volume and a repeat void upon predictive values for high-grade urothelial carcinoma. Cancer Cytopathol. 2016;124(3):174–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Renshaw AA, Gould EW. Evidence-based adequacy criteria for instrumented urine cytology using cytospin preparations. Diagn Cytopathol. 2018;46:520–1.  https://doi.org/10.1002/dc.23890.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Barkan GA, Wojcik EM, Nayar R, Savic-Prince S, Quek ML, Kurtycz DF, Rosenthal DL. The Paris system for reporting urinary cytology: the quest to develop a standardized terminology. Acta Cytol. 2016;60(3):185–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hattori M, Nishimura Y, Toyonaga M, Kakinuma H, Matsumoto K, Ohbu M. Cytological significance of abnormal squamous cells in urinary cytology. Diagn Cytopathol. 2012;40(9):798–803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Massaro PA, Moore J, Rahmeh T, Morse MJ. Squamous cell carcinoma of the suprapubic tract: a rare presentation in patients with chronic indwelling urinary catheters. Can Urol Assoc J. 2014;8(7–8):E510–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mostafa MH, Sheweita SA, O’Connor PJ. Relationship between schistosomiasis and bladder cancer. Clin Microbiol Rev. 1999;12(1):97–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nasuti JF, Fleisher SR, Gupta PK. Significance of tissue fragments in voided urine specimens. Acta Cytol. 2001;45(2):147–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Onur I, Rosenthal DL, VandenBussche CJ. Benign-appearing urothelial tissue fragments in noninstrumented voided urine specimens are associated with low rates of urothelial neoplasia. Cancer Cytopathol. 2015;123(3):180–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Doxtader EE, Elsheikh TM. Diagnosis of trichomoniasis in men by urine cytology. Cancer Cytopathol. 2017;125(1):55–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nakashima K, Shigehara K, Kawaguchi S, Wakatsuki A, Kobori Y, Nakashima K, Ishii Y, Shimamura M, Sasagawa T, Kitagawa Y, Mizokami A, Namiki M. Prevalence of human papillomavirus infection in the oropharynx and urine among sexually active men: a comparative study of infection by papillomavirus and other organisms, including Neisseria gonorrhoeae, Chlamydia trachomatis, Mycoplasma spp., and Ureaplasma spp. BMC Infect Dis. 2014;14:43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Singh HK, Bubendorf L, Mihatsch MJ, et al. Urine cytology findings of polyomavirus infections. In: Madame curie bioscience database [internet]. Austin: Landes Bioscience; 2000–2013. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK6541/.
  19. 19.
    Herawi M, Parwani AV, Chan T, Ali SZ, Epstein JI. Polyoma virus-associated cellular changes in the urine and bladder biopsy samples: a cytohistologic correlation. Am J Surg Pathol. 2006;30(3):345–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kipp BR, Sebo TJ, Griffin MD, Ihrke JM, Halling KC. Analysis of polyomavirus-infected renal transplant recipients’ urine specimens: correlation of routine urine cytology, fluorescence in situ hybridization, and digital image analysis. Am J Clin Pathol. 2005;124(6):854–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Randhawa P, Vats A, Shapiro R. Monitoring for polyomavirus BK and JC in urine: comparison of quantitative polymerase chain reaction with urine cytology. Transplantation. 2005;79(8):984–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
  23. 23.
    Raab SS, Lenel JC, Cohen MB. Low grade transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder. Cytologic diagnosis by key features as identified by logistic regression analysis. Cancer. 1994;74(5):1621–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Brimo F, Vollmer T, Case B, Aprikian A, Kassouf W, Auger M. Accuracy of urine cytology and the significance of an atypical category. Am J Clin Pathol. 2009;132(5):785–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kannan V, Gupta D. Calculus artifact. A challenge in urinary cytology. Acta Cytol. 1999;43(5):794–800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Deshpande V, McKee GT. Analysis of atypical urine cytology in a tertiary care center. Cancer. 2005;105(6):468–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sullivan PS, Chan JB, Levin MR, Rao J. Urine cytology and adjunct markers for detection and surveillance of bladder cancer. Am J Transl Res. 2010;2(4):412–40.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Krishnan B, Truong LD. Prostatic adenocarcinoma diagnosed by urinary cytology. Am J Clin Pathol. 2000;113(1):29–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Tyler KL, Selvaggi SM. Morphologic features of prostatic adenocarcinoma on ThinPrep® urinary cytology. Diagn Cytopathol. 2011;39(2):101–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Vandersteen DP, Wiemerslage SJ, Cohen MB. Prostatic duct adenocarcinoma: a cytologic and histologic case report with review of the literature. Diagn Cytopathol. 1997;17(6):480–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Berrettini A, Castagnetti M, Salerno A, Nappo SG, Manzoni G, Rigamonti W, Caione P. Bladder urothelial neoplasms in pediatric age: experience at three tertiary centers. J Pediatr Urol. 2015;11(1):26.e1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Pathology and Laboratory MedicineTemple University HospitalPhiladelphiaUSA
  2. 2.Department of PathologyRobert Wood Johnson University HospitalNew BrunswickUSA

Personalised recommendations