Background: This study investigates the use of The Paris System (TPS) for Reporting Urinary Cytopathology and examines the performance of individual and combined morphological features in atypical urine cytologies. Methods: We reviewed 118 atypical cytologies with subsequent bladder biopsies for the presence of several morphological features and reclassified them into Paris System categories. The sensitivity and specificity of individual and combined features were calculated along with the risk of malignancy. Results: An elevated nuclear-to-cytoplasmic ratio was only predictive of malignancy if seen in single cells, while irregular nuclear borders, hyperchromasia, and coarse granular chromatin were predictive in single cells and in groups. Identification of coarse chromatin alone yielded a malignancy risk comparable to 2-feature combinations. The use of TPS criteria identified the specimens at a higher risk of malignancy. Conclusion: Our findings support the use of TPS criteria, suggesting that the presence of coarse chromatin is more specific than other individual features, and confirming that cytologic atypia is more worrisome in single cells than in groups.

Keywords:
Urine cytology, Atypical urothelial cells, Paris System
1.
Layfield LJ, Elsheikh TM, Fili A, Nayar R, Shidham V: Review of the state of the art and recommendations of the Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology for urinary cytology procedures and reporting: the Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology Practice Guidelines Task Force. Diagn Cytopathol 2004;30:24-30.
2.
Bostwick DG, Hossain D: Does subdivision of the “atypical” urine cytology increase predictive accuracy for urothelial carcinoma? Diagn Cytopathol 2014;42:1034-1044.
3.
McCroskey Z, Bahar B, Hu Z, Wojcik EM, Barkan GA: Subclassifying atypia in urine cytology: what are the helpful features? J Am Soc Cytopathol 2015;4:183-189.
4.
Rosenthal DL, VandenBussche CJ, Burroughs FH, Sathiyamoorthy S, Guan H, Owens C: The Johns Hopkins Hospital template for urologic cytology samples. Cancer Cytopathol 2013;121:15-20.
5.
VandenBussche CJ, Sathiyamoorthy S, Owens CL, Burroughs FH, Rosenthal DL, Guan H: The Johns Hopkins Hospital template for urologic cytology samples. Cancer Cytopathol 2013;121:21-28.
6.
Wu HH, Redelman M, Chen S, Grignon DJ, Cramer HM: The application of the Johns Hopkins Hospital Template on urine cytology. Diagn Cytopathol 2015;43:593-597.
7.
Olson MT, Novak A, Boonyaarunnate T, Trotter J, Sachs S, Kelly D, Ford S, Cornish TC, Toll A, Tatsas AD, Maleki Z: Reproducibility of the Johns Hopkins Hospital template for urologic cytology samples. J Am Soc Cytopathol 2014;3:156-164.
8.
Rosenthal DL, Wojcik EM, Kurtycz DF: The Paris System for Reporting Urinary Cytology. Springer International Publishing, 2016.
9.
Zhang ML, Guo AX, VandenBussche CJ: Morphologists overestimate the nuclear-to-cytoplasmic ratio. Cancer Cytopathol 2016;124:669-677.
10.
Glass RE, Coutsouvelis C, Sheikh-Fayyaz S, Chau K, Rosen L, Brenkert R, Slim F, Epelbaum F, Das K, Cocker RS: Two-tiered subdivision of atypia on urine cytology can improve patient follow-up and optimize the utility of UroVysion. Cancer Cytopathol 2016;124:188-195.
11.
Vaickus LJ, Tambouret RH: Young investigator challenge: the accuracy of the nuclear-to-cytoplasmic ratio estimation among trained morphologists. Cancer Cytopathol 2015;123:524-530.
12.
Mokhtar GA, Al-Dousari M, Al-Ghamedi D: Diagnostic significance of atypical category in the voided urine samples: a retrospective study in a tertiary care center. Urol Ann 2010;2:100.
13.
Deshpande V, McKee GT: Analysis of atypical urine cytology in a tertiary care center. Cancer Cytopathol 2005;105:468-475.
14.
Granados R, Butrón M, Santonja C, Rodríguez JM, Martín A, Duarte J, Camarmo E, Corrales T, Aramburu JA: Increased risk of malignancy for non-atypical urothelial cell groups compared to negative cytology in voided urine. Morphological changes with LBC. Diagn Cytopathol 2016;44:582-590.
15.
Wojcik EM: What should not be reported as atypia in urine cytology. J Am Soc Cytopathol 2015;4:30-36.
16.
Miller S, Xing J, Pantanowitz L, Monaco S: Characterization and follow-up of atypical urine cytology cases with cell clusters. J Am Soc Cytopathol 2016;5:S23.
17.
Mai KT, Ball CG, Kos Z, Belanger EC, Islam S, Sekhon H: Three-dimensional cell groups with disordered nuclei and cellular discohesion (3DDD) are associated with high sensitivity and specificity for cystoscopic urine cytopathological diagnosis of low-grade urothelial neoplasia. Diagn Cytopathol 2014;42:555-563.
18.
Onur I, Rosenthal DL, VandenBussche CJ: Benign-appearing urothelial tissue fragments in noninstrumented voided urine specimens are associated with low rates of urothelial neoplasia. Cancer Cytopathol 2015;123:180-185.
19.
Onur I, Rosenthal DL, VandenBussche CJ: Atypical urothelial tissue fragments in noninstrumented voided urine specimens are associated with low but significantly higher rates of urothelial neoplasia than benign-appearing urothelial tissue fragments. Cancer Cytopathol 2015;123:186-192.
20.
Deshpande V, McKee GT: Analysis of atypical urine cytology in a tertiary care center. Cancer Cytopathol 2005;105:468-475.
21.
Nasuti JF, Fleisher SR, Gupta PK: Significance of tissue fragments in voided urine specimens. Acta Cytol 2001;45:147-152.
22.
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.
23.
Cowan ML, Rosenthal DL, VandenBussche CJ: Improved risk stratification for patients with high-grade urothelial carcinoma following application of the Paris System for Reporting Urinary Cytology. Cancer Cytopathol 2017;125:427-434.
24.
Miki Y, Neat M, Chandra A: Application of The Paris System to atypical urine cytology samples: correlation with histology and UroVysion® FISH. Cytopathology 2017;28:88-95.
25.
Barkan G, Chatt G, Mehrotra S, Wojcik E, Pambuccian S: Implementation of the Paris System (TPS) of Reporting Urinary Cytology: the growing pains. J Am Soc Cytopathol 2016;5:S87-S88.
26.
Layfield L, Schmidt R, Esebua M, Frazier S, Giorgadze DT: Interobserver Reproducibility of the Paris System for Reporting Urinary Cytology. J Am Soc Cytopathol 2016;5:S22.
27.
Granados R, Duarte JA, Corrales T, Camarmo E, Bajo P: Applying the Paris System for Reporting Urine Cytology increases the rate of atypical urothelial cells in benign cases: a need for patient management recommendations. Acta Cytol 2017;61:71-76.
© 2017 S. Karger AG, Basel
2017
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.