Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Urinary Tract Cytology

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Diagnostic Liquid-Based Cytology

  • 1498 Accesses

Abstract

In 2016, approximately 76,000 new cases of bladder carcinoma will be diagnosed in the United States. Of these, around 58,000 will be in men and 18,000 in women. Approximately 16,000 bladder cancer-related deaths will occur in 2016. About 50 % of bladder cancer cases are diagnosed while it is noninvasive, and around 35 % are diagnosed when it has invaded into deeper layers of the bladder, but the disease is still confined to the organ (American Cancer Society, Cancer Facts and Figures, 2016).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Suggested Reading

  1. Kannan V, Bose S. Low grade transitional cell carcinoma and instrument artifact. A challenge in urinary cytology. Acta Cytol. 1993;37:899–902.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Prather J, Arville B, Chatt G, Pambuccian SE, Wojcik EM, Quek ML, Barkan GA. Evidence-based adequacy criteria for urinary bladder barbotage cytology. J Am Soc Cytopathol. 2015;4:57–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Wolinska WH, Melamed MR. Urinary conduit cytology. Cancer. 1973;32:1000–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Owens CL, Ali SZ. Atypical squamous cells in exfoliative urinary cytology: clinicopathologic correlates. Diagn Cytopathol. 2005;33:394–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Zaharopoulos P. Cytologic manifestations of cystitis follicularis in urine specimens. Diagn Cytopathol. 2002;27:205–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Wright RG, Halford JA. Evaluation of thin-layer methods in urine cytology. Cytopathology. 2001;12:306–13.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Bohlmeyer TJ, Shroyer KR. Endometriosis of the bladder: cytologic findings and differentiation from transitional cell carcinoma. Acta Cytol. 1996;40:383–4.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Allison DB, Olston MT, Lilo M, Zhang ML, Rosenthal DL, VandenBussche CJ. Should the BK polyomavirus cytopathic effect be best classified as atypical or benign in urine cytology specimens? Cancer Cytopathol. 2016;124:436–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Waugh MS, Perfect JR, Dash RC. Schistosoma haematobium in urine: morphology with ThinPrep method. Diagn Cytopathol. 2007a;35:649–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Onur I, Rosenthal DL, VandenBussche CJ. Atypical urothelial tissue fragments in noninstrumented voided urine specimens are associated with low but significantly higher rates of urothelial neoplasia than benign-appearing urothelial tissue fragments. Cancer Cytopathol. 2015;123:186–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Takashi M, Schenck U, Koshikawa T, Nakashima N, Ohshimad S. Cytological changes induced by intravesical Bacillus Calmette-Guérin. Urol Int. 2000;64:74–81.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Vaickus LJ, Tambouret RH. Young investigator challenge: the accuracy of the nuclear-to-cytoplasmic ratio estimation among trained morphologists. Cancer Cytopathol. 2015;123:524–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. VandenBussche CJ, Sathiyamoorthy S, Owens CL, Burroughs FH, Rosenthal DL, Guan H. The Johns Hopkins Hospital template for urologic cytology samples: parts II and III: improving the predictability of indeterminate results in urinary cytologic samples: an outcomes and cytomorphologic study. Cancer Cytopathol. 2013;121:21–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. McCroskey Z, Kliethermes S, Bahar B, Barkan GA, Pambuccian SE, Wojcik EM. Is a consistent cytologic diagnosis of low-grade urothelial carcinoma in instrumented urinary tract cytologic specimens possible? A comparison between cytomorphologic features of low-grade urothelial carcinoma and non-neoplastic changes shows extensive overlap, making a reliable diagnosis impossible. J Am Soc Cytopathol. 2015;4:90–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Xin W, Raab SS, Michael CW. Low-grade urothelial carcinoma: reappraisal of the cytologic criteria on ThinPrep. Diagn Cytopathol. 2003a;29:125–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Reid MD, Osunkoya AO, Siddiqui MT, Looney SW. Accuracy of grading of urothelial carcinoma on urine cytology: an analysis of interobserver and intraobserver agreement. Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2012;5:882–91.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Ainechi S, Pambuccian SE, Wojcik EM, Barkan G. Cytomorphologic features and differential diagnosis of neoplasms with small cell features in liquid-based urinary tract specimens. J Am Soc Cytopathol. 2015;4:295–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Bardales RH, Pitman MB, Stanley MW, Korourian S, Suhrland MJ. Urine cytology of primary and secondary urinary bladder adenocarcinoma. Cancer Cytopathol. 1998;84:335–43.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Zardawi IM, Duncan J. Evaluation of a centrifuge method and thin-layer preparation in urine cytology. Acta Cytol. 2003;47:1038–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Nassar H, Ali-Fehmi R, Madan S. Use of ThinPrep monolayer technique and cytospin preparation in urine cytology: a comparative analysis. Diagn Cytopathol. 2003;28:115–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Piaton E, Faÿnel J, Hutin K, Ranchin MC, Cottier M. Conventional liquid-based techniques versus Cytyc Thinprep processing of urinary samples: a qualitative approach. BMC Clin Pathol. 2005;5:9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Koss LG, Melamed MR. Koss’ diagnostic cytology and its histopathologic bases. 5th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott; 2006, Chapter 22, pp. 738–76.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Glatz K, Willi N, Glatz D, Barascud A, Grilli B, Herzog M, Dalquen P, Feichter G, Gasser TC, Sulser T, Bubendorf L. An international telecytologic quiz on urinary cytology reveals educational deficits and absence of a commonly used classification system. Am J Clin Pathol. 2006;126:294–301.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Hwang EC, Park SH, Jung SI, Kwon DD, Park K, Ryu SB, Park CS. Usefulness of liquid-based preparation in urine cytology. Int J Urol. 2007;14:626–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Hoda RS. Non-gynecologic cytology on liquid-based preparations: a morphologic review of facts and artifacts. Diagn Cytopathol. 2007;35:621–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Norimatsu Y, Kawanishi N, Shigematsu Y, Kawabe T, Ohsaki H, Kobayashi TK. Use of liquid-based preparations in urine cytology: an evaluation of Liqui-PREP and BD SurePath. Diagn Cytopathol. 2010;38:702–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Voss JS, Kipp BR, Krueger AK, Clayton AC, Halling KC, Karnes RJ, Henry MR, Sebo TJ. Changes in specimen preparation method may impact urine cytologic evaluation. Am J Clin Pathol. 2008;130:428–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Lu DY, Nassar A, Siddiqui MT. High-grade urothelial carcinoma: comparison of SurePath liquid-based processing with cytospin processing. Diagn Cytopathol. 2009;37:16–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Laucirica R, Bentz JS, Souers RJ, Wasserman PG, Crothers BA, Clayton AC, Henry MR, Chmara BA, Clary KM, Fraig MM, Moriarty AT. Do liquid-based preparations of urinary cytology perform differently than classically prepared cases? Observations from the CAP interlaboratory comparison program in nongynecologic cytology. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2010;134:19–22.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Koss LG, Hoda RS. Koss’s cytology of the urinary tract with histopathologic correlations. New York: Springer; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Huysentruyt CJ, Baldewijns MM, Rüland AM, Tonk RJ, Vervoort PS, Smits KM, van de Beek C, Speel EJ. Modified UroVysion scoring criteria increase the urothelial carcinoma detection rate in cases of equivocal urinary cytology. Histopathology. 2011;58:1048–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Raisi O, Magnani C, Bigiani N, Cianciavicchia E, D’Amico R, Muscatello U, Ghirardini C. The diagnostic reliability of urinary cytology: a retrospective study. Diagn Cytopathol. 2012;40:608–14.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Piaton E, Decaussin-Petrucci M, Mege-Lechevallier F, Advenier AS, Devonec M, Ruffion A. Diagnostic terminology for urinary cytology reports including the new subcategories “atypical urothelial cells of undetermined significance” (AUC-US) and “cannot exclude high grade” (AUC-H). Cytopathology. 2014;25:27–38.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CBL Path, Rye Brook, NY, USA

    Rana S. Hoda FIAC

  2. Department of Pathology, Johns Hopkins University Department of Pathology, Baltimore, MD, USA

    Christopher VandenBussche

  3. New York Presbyterian Hospital Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA

    Syed A. Hoda

Authors
  1. Rana S. Hoda FIAC
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christopher VandenBussche
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Syed A. Hoda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hoda, R.S., VandenBussche, C., Hoda, S.A. (2017). Urinary Tract Cytology. In: Diagnostic Liquid-Based Cytology. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-53905-7_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-53905-7_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-662-53903-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-662-53905-7

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation