Adequacy criteria for voided urine cytology using cytospin preparations
Andrew A. Renshaw, Edwin W. Gould
Abstract
Open-access reader
Andrew A. Renshaw, Edwin W. Gould
Abstract
Open-access reader
BACKGROUND: Previous studies have suggested that urine cytology adequacy may be related to both specimen volume and cellularity. METHODS: The authors reviewed cytospin preparations from 314 urine specimens (162 voided and 152 instrumented specimens) found to have high-grade urothelial carcinoma on biopsy. RESULTS: The sensitivity of instrumented urine cytology was significantly higher than that of voided cytology (82% vs 25%; P < .001). The cellularity (at least 30 urothelial cells/10 high-power fields [HPF]) of instrumented urine specimens also was significantly higher than that of voided specimens (57% vs 9%; P < .001). The sensitivity of voided urine cytology with a cellularity of 20 to 39 cells per 10 HPF was significantly higher than that of cases with <20 cells per 10 HPF (77% vs 19%; P < .001). The sensitivity decreased with higher cellularity for both types of specimens. The sensitivity of voided cases with a volume of at least 30 mL was higher than that of cases with a volume <30 mL, but this was not statistically significant (31% vs 17%; P = .07). CONCLUSIONS: The sensitivity of voided urine cytology for high-grade urothelial carcinoma is significantly associated with urothelial cellularity but not specimen volume. Both the cellularity and sensitivity of voided urine specimens are less than that of instrumented specimens.
OpenAlex reports 14 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
BACKGROUND: Previous studies have suggested that urine cytology adequacy may be related to both specimen volume and cellularity. METHODS: The authors reviewed cytospin preparations from 314 urine specimens (162 voided and 152 instrumented specimens) found to have high-grade urothelial carcinoma on biopsy. RESULTS: The sensitivity of instrumented urine cytology was significantly higher than that of voided cytology (82% vs 25%; P < .001). The cellularity (at least 30 urothelial cells/10 high-power fields [HPF]) of instrumented urine specimens also was significantly higher than that of voided specimens (57% vs 9%; P < .001). The sensitivity of voided urine cytology with a cellularity of 20 to 39 cells per 10 HPF was significantly higher than that of cases with <20 cells per 10 HPF (77% vs 19%; P < .001). The sensitivity decreased with higher cellularity for both types of specimens. The sensitivity of voided cases with a volume of at least 30 mL was higher than that of cases with a volume <30 mL, but this was not statistically significant (31% vs 17%; P = .07). CONCLUSIONS: The sensitivity of voided urine cytology for high-grade urothelial carcinoma is significantly associated with urothelial cellularity but not specimen volume. Both the cellularity and sensitivity of voided urine specimens are less than that of instrumented specimens.
Key concepts: Urine cytology, Urine, Medicine, Cytology, Urology, Urothelial carcinoma, Biopsy, Pathology