Urine cytology in the evaluation of urological malignancy revisited: is it still necessary?
AffiliationDepartment of Urology, Mercy University Hospital, Glenville Place, Cork, Ireland., email@example.com
Aged, 80 and over
Carcinoma, Transitional Cell/pathology
False Positive Reactions
Sensitivity and Specificity
Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/*pathology/urine
MetadataShow full item record
CitationUrol Int. 2010;84(1):45-9. Epub 2010 Feb 17.
AbstractOBJECTIVE: We aim to determine if urine cytology was still necessary as a routine part of the evaluation for the presence of urological malignancy and to evaluate its cost effectiveness. METHODS: Urine cytology reports over a 6-year period (2000-2005) were retrieved from our institution's pathology department database. Patients with urine cytology positive for malignant cells were identified. We retrospectively reviewed the charts of these patients for age, sex, flexible cystoscopy and radiological imaging results. The cost of urine cytology was retrieved from the pathology department. RESULTS: There were a total of 2,568 urine cytological examinations. Of these, 25 were positive for malignant cells. There were 19 male (76%) and 6 female (24%) patients with a mean age of 72 years (range: 49-97). In 21 patients with positive cytology, a bladder tumor was identified at flexible cystoscopy and/or imaging studies. For a positive cytology yield of 1%, EUR 210,000 was spent. CONCLUSIONS: Routine urine cytology was not cost effective and did not add to the diagnostic yield beyond cystoscopy and diagnostic imaging. It may be omitted in the initial evaluation of urological malignancy.