-
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
Status neindexováno Jazyk angličtina Země Švýcarsko
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články
NLK
Directory of Open Access Journals
od 2011
PubMed Central
od 2011
Europe PubMed Central
od 2011
ProQuest Central
od 2011-01-01
Open Access Digital Library
od 2011-01-01
Open Access Digital Library
od 2011-01-01
ROAD: Directory of Open Access Scholarly Resources
od 2011
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
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.
Department of Medical Biophysics Medical Faculty Palacký University 77900 Olomouc Czech Republic
Department of Urology University Hospital Olomouc 77900 Olomouc Czech Republic
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