Changes in specimen preparation method may impact urine cytologic evaluation

American Journal of Clinical Pathology

Volumn 130, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 428-433

  Voss, Jesse S ^a   Kipp, Benjamin R ^a   Krueger, Angela K ^a   Clayton, Amy C ^a   Halling, Kevin C ^a   Karnes, R Jeffrey ^b   Henry, Michael R ^a   Sebo, Thomas J ^a  

^a MAYO CLINIC   (United States)

^b DEPARTMENT OF UROLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

Transitional cell carcinoma; Urothelial cancer

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BLADDER BIOPSY; BLADDER CARCINOMA; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; FEMALE; FILTER; FOLLOW UP; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LABORATORY DIAGNOSIS; MALE; MEDICAL RECORD REVIEW; PRIORITY JOURNAL; URINE CYTOLOGY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; SPECIMEN HANDLING; URINARY BLADDER NEOPLASMS; URINE;

EID: 51349153413     PISSN: 00029173     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1309/VP1XQ5GPQ687W1HU     Document Type: Article

References (11)

1. Wright RG, Halford JA. Evaluation of thin-layer methods in urine cytology. Cytopathology. 2001;12:306-313.
2. Elsheikh TM, Kirkpatrick JL, Wu HH. Comparison of ThinPrep and Cytospin preparations in the evaluation of exfoliative cytology specimens. Cancer. 2006;108:144-149.
3. Hwang EC, Park SH, Jung SI, et al. Usefulness of liquid-based preparation in urine cytology. Int J Urol. 2007;14:626-629.
4. Leung CS, Chiu B, Bell V. Comparison of ThinPrep and conventional preparations: nongynecologic cytology evaluation. Diagn Cytopathol. 1997;16:368-371.
5. Luthra UK, Dey P, George J, et al. Comparison of ThinPrep and conventional preparations: urine cytology evaluation. Diagn Cytopathol. 1999;21:364-366.
6. Nassar H, Ali-Fehmi R, Madan S. Use of ThinPrep monolayer technique and Cytospin preparation in urine cytology: a comparative analysis. Diagn Cytopathol. 2003;28:115-118.
7. Nasuti JF, Tam D, Gupta PK. Diagnostic value of liquid-based (ThinPrep) preparations in nongynecologic cases. Diagn Cytopathol. 2001;24:137-141.
8. Piaton E, Faÿnel J, Hutin K, et al. Conventional liquid-based techniques versus Cytyc ThinPrep processing of urinary samples: a qualitative approach. BMC Clin Pathol. 2005;5:9. doi:10.1186/1472-6890-5-9.
9. Nabi G, Greene D, O'Donnell MO. Suspicious urinary cytology with negative evaluation for malignancy in the diagnostic investigation of haematuria: how to follow up? J Clin Pathol. 2004;57:365-368.
10. Deshpande V, McKee GT. Analysis of atypical urine cytology in a tertiary care center. Cancer. 2005;105:468-475.
11. Lotan Y, Roehrborn CG. Sensitivity and specificity of commonly available bladder tumor markers versus cytology: results of a comprehensive literature review and meta-analyses. Urology. 2003;61:109-118.