Detail
Článek
Článek online
FT
Medvik - BMČ
  • Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

Iodinated Contrast Medium Affects Urine Cytology Assessment: A Prospective, Single-Blind Study and Its Impact on Urological Practice

M. Kral, P. Zemla, D. Hradil, H. Skotak, I. Hartmann, K. Langova, J. Bouchal, D. Kurfurstova

. 2022 ; 12 (10) : . [pub] 20221013

Status neindexováno Jazyk angličtina Země Švýcarsko

Typ dokumentu časopisecké články

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc22031546

During endoscopic procedures for suspected urothelial tumors of the upper urinary tract, radiographic imaging using an iodinated contrast medium is often required. However, following ureteropyelography, we detected changes in cytology characteristics not correlating with real cytology findings in naive urine. The aim of our study was to assess cytology changes between naive and postcontrast urine according to The Paris System of cytology classification. Methods: We prospectively assessed urine samples from 89 patients (23 patients with histologically proven urothelial cancer and 66 healthy volunteers). The absence of malignancy was demonstrated by CT urography and/or ureteroscopy. The study was single blind (expert cytopathologist) and naïve Paris system for urine cytology assessment was used. Furthermore, additional cytological parameters were analyzed (e.g., specimen cellularity, degree of cytolysis, cytoplasm and nucleus color, chromatin and nucleo-cytoplasmic ratio). Results: Our study showed statistically significant differences when comparing naïve and postcontrast urine in healthy volunteers (only 51 % concordance, p = 0.001) versus malignant urine specimens (82 % concordance). The most important differences were in the shift from The Paris System category 2 (negative) to 1 (non-diagnostic) and from category 2 (negative) to 3 (atypia). Other significant changes were found in the assessment of specimen cellularity (p = 0.0003), degree of cytolysis (p = 0.001), cytoplasm color (p = 0.003), hyperchromasia (p = 0.001), course chromatin (p = 0.002), nucleo-cytoplasmatic ratio (p = 0.001) and nuclear borders' irregularity (p = 0.01). Conclusion: Our unique study found crucial changes in the cytological assessment of naive and postcontrast urine and we confirm that postcontrast urine is more often assessed as abnormal, suspect or non-diagnostic. Therefore, before urine collection for cytology, the clinician should avoid administration of iodinated contrast into the urinary tract.

Citace poskytuje Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc22031546
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20230127131218.0
007      
ta
008      
230119s2022 sz f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.3390/diagnostics12102483 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)36292171
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a sz
100    1_
$a Kral, Milan $u Department of Urology, University Hospital Olomouc, 77900 Olomouc, Czech Republic $1 https://orcid.org/0000000318515179
245    10
$a Iodinated Contrast Medium Affects Urine Cytology Assessment: A Prospective, Single-Blind Study and Its Impact on Urological Practice / $c M. Kral, P. Zemla, D. Hradil, H. Skotak, I. Hartmann, K. Langova, J. Bouchal, D. Kurfurstova
520    9_
$a During endoscopic procedures for suspected urothelial tumors of the upper urinary tract, radiographic imaging using an iodinated contrast medium is often required. However, following ureteropyelography, we detected changes in cytology characteristics not correlating with real cytology findings in naive urine. The aim of our study was to assess cytology changes between naive and postcontrast urine according to The Paris System of cytology classification. Methods: We prospectively assessed urine samples from 89 patients (23 patients with histologically proven urothelial cancer and 66 healthy volunteers). The absence of malignancy was demonstrated by CT urography and/or ureteroscopy. The study was single blind (expert cytopathologist) and naïve Paris system for urine cytology assessment was used. Furthermore, additional cytological parameters were analyzed (e.g., specimen cellularity, degree of cytolysis, cytoplasm and nucleus color, chromatin and nucleo-cytoplasmic ratio). Results: Our study showed statistically significant differences when comparing naïve and postcontrast urine in healthy volunteers (only 51 % concordance, p = 0.001) versus malignant urine specimens (82 % concordance). The most important differences were in the shift from The Paris System category 2 (negative) to 1 (non-diagnostic) and from category 2 (negative) to 3 (atypia). Other significant changes were found in the assessment of specimen cellularity (p = 0.0003), degree of cytolysis (p = 0.001), cytoplasm color (p = 0.003), hyperchromasia (p = 0.001), course chromatin (p = 0.002), nucleo-cytoplasmatic ratio (p = 0.001) and nuclear borders' irregularity (p = 0.01). Conclusion: Our unique study found crucial changes in the cytological assessment of naive and postcontrast urine and we confirm that postcontrast urine is more often assessed as abnormal, suspect or non-diagnostic. Therefore, before urine collection for cytology, the clinician should avoid administration of iodinated contrast into the urinary tract.
590    __
$a NEINDEXOVÁNO
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
700    1_
$a Zemla, Pavel $u Department of Urology, University Hospital Olomouc, 77900 Olomouc, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Hradil, David $u Department of Urology, University Hospital Olomouc, 77900 Olomouc, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Skotak, Hynek $u Department of Urology, University Hospital Olomouc, 77900 Olomouc, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Hartmann, Igor $u Department of Urology, University Hospital Olomouc, 77900 Olomouc, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Langova, Katerina $u Department of Medical Biophysics, Medical Faculty, Palacký University, 77900 Olomouc, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Bouchal, Jan $u Department of Clinical and Molecular Pathology, University Hospital Olomouc, 77900 Olomouc, Czech Republic $u Department of Clinical and Molecular Pathology, Institute of Molecular and Translational Medicine, Medical Faculty, Palacký University, 77900 Olomouc, Czech Republic $1 https://orcid.org/0000000348421720
700    1_
$a Kurfurstova, Daniela $u Department of Clinical and Molecular Pathology, University Hospital Olomouc, 77900 Olomouc, Czech Republic
773    0_
$w MED00195450 $t Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) $x 2075-4418 $g Roč. 12, č. 10 (2022)
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36292171 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y p $z 0
990    __
$a 20230119 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20230127131210 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1889539 $s 1182879
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC-PubMed-not-MEDLINE
BMC    __
$a 2022 $b 12 $c 10 $e 20221013 $i 2075-4418 $m Diagnostics $n Diagnostics $x MED00195450
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20230119

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Nahrávání dat ...

Možnosti archivace

Nahrávání dat ...