Correlation of cystoscopic impression with histologic diagnosis of biopsy specimens of the bladder

Stephen J. Cina, Jonathan I. Epstein, Joseph M. Endrizzi, William J. Harmon, Thomas M. Seay, Mark P. Schoenberg

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

62 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

There is a paucity of information in the contemporary literature that would permit assessment of the urologist's ability to endoscopically discriminate between benign and malignant lesions of the bladder or to predict the grade and stage of papillary neoplasms. This prospective study evaluates the correlation between cystoscopic impression of urothelial lesions and final histologic diagnoses. Sixty-four patients with 68 urothelial abnormalities requiring formal biopsy or endoscopic resection were evaluated prospectively. At the time of endoscopy, treating urologists completed questionnaires documenting the surgeon's endoscopic impression of disease type and extent and performed standard biopsy or resection of all suspicious lesions. Specimens were submitted for routine histopathologic analysis, and the results were correlated with the questionnaire data. Endoscopic evaluation correctly discriminated between dysplastic/malignant and benign/reactive lesions in this study with a sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 100%, and positive and negative predictive values of 100%. Urologists could not readily distinguish between low- and high-grade papillary urothelial lesions and were frequently unable to determine if a tumor was invasive, particularly if the degree of invasion was microscopic. Endoscopic impression at the time of bladder biopsy or resection is accurate and discriminates between the presence and absence of cancer. Endoscopic impression alone is a relatively poor staging tool with respect to extent of invasive disease and must be coupled with careful histopathologic analysis of biopsy material, bimanual examination when appropriate, and axial imaging for complete assessment of a given tumor.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)630-637
Number of pages8
JournalHuman Pathology
Volume32
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - 2001
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Urinary Bladder
Biopsy
Neoplasms
Literature
Endoscopy
Prospective Studies
Sensitivity and Specificity
Urologists
Surveys and Questionnaires

Keywords

  • Biopsy
  • Bladder
  • Cystoscopy
  • Histology

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pathology and Forensic Medicine

Cite this

Correlation of cystoscopic impression with histologic diagnosis of biopsy specimens of the bladder. / Cina, Stephen J.; Epstein, Jonathan I.; Endrizzi, Joseph M.; Harmon, William J.; Seay, Thomas M.; Schoenberg, Mark P.

In: Human Pathology, Vol. 32, No. 6, 2001, p. 630-637.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Cina, Stephen J. ; Epstein, Jonathan I. ; Endrizzi, Joseph M. ; Harmon, William J. ; Seay, Thomas M. ; Schoenberg, Mark P. / Correlation of cystoscopic impression with histologic diagnosis of biopsy specimens of the bladder. In: Human Pathology. 2001 ; Vol. 32, No. 6. pp. 630-637.
@article{5614ef2bc28249839ce2e18d6940e9e1,
title = "Correlation of cystoscopic impression with histologic diagnosis of biopsy specimens of the bladder",
abstract = "There is a paucity of information in the contemporary literature that would permit assessment of the urologist's ability to endoscopically discriminate between benign and malignant lesions of the bladder or to predict the grade and stage of papillary neoplasms. This prospective study evaluates the correlation between cystoscopic impression of urothelial lesions and final histologic diagnoses. Sixty-four patients with 68 urothelial abnormalities requiring formal biopsy or endoscopic resection were evaluated prospectively. At the time of endoscopy, treating urologists completed questionnaires documenting the surgeon's endoscopic impression of disease type and extent and performed standard biopsy or resection of all suspicious lesions. Specimens were submitted for routine histopathologic analysis, and the results were correlated with the questionnaire data. Endoscopic evaluation correctly discriminated between dysplastic/malignant and benign/reactive lesions in this study with a sensitivity of 100{\%}, specificity of 100{\%}, and positive and negative predictive values of 100{\%}. Urologists could not readily distinguish between low- and high-grade papillary urothelial lesions and were frequently unable to determine if a tumor was invasive, particularly if the degree of invasion was microscopic. Endoscopic impression at the time of bladder biopsy or resection is accurate and discriminates between the presence and absence of cancer. Endoscopic impression alone is a relatively poor staging tool with respect to extent of invasive disease and must be coupled with careful histopathologic analysis of biopsy material, bimanual examination when appropriate, and axial imaging for complete assessment of a given tumor.",
keywords = "Biopsy, Bladder, Cystoscopy, Histology",
author = "Cina, {Stephen J.} and Epstein, {Jonathan I.} and Endrizzi, {Joseph M.} and Harmon, {William J.} and Seay, {Thomas M.} and Schoenberg, {Mark P.}",
year = "2001",
doi = "10.1053/hupa.2001.24999",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "32",
pages = "630--637",
journal = "Human Pathology",
issn = "0046-8177",
publisher = "W.B. Saunders Ltd",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Correlation of cystoscopic impression with histologic diagnosis of biopsy specimens of the bladder

AU - Cina, Stephen J.

AU - Epstein, Jonathan I.

AU - Endrizzi, Joseph M.

AU - Harmon, William J.

AU - Seay, Thomas M.

AU - Schoenberg, Mark P.

PY - 2001

Y1 - 2001

N2 - There is a paucity of information in the contemporary literature that would permit assessment of the urologist's ability to endoscopically discriminate between benign and malignant lesions of the bladder or to predict the grade and stage of papillary neoplasms. This prospective study evaluates the correlation between cystoscopic impression of urothelial lesions and final histologic diagnoses. Sixty-four patients with 68 urothelial abnormalities requiring formal biopsy or endoscopic resection were evaluated prospectively. At the time of endoscopy, treating urologists completed questionnaires documenting the surgeon's endoscopic impression of disease type and extent and performed standard biopsy or resection of all suspicious lesions. Specimens were submitted for routine histopathologic analysis, and the results were correlated with the questionnaire data. Endoscopic evaluation correctly discriminated between dysplastic/malignant and benign/reactive lesions in this study with a sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 100%, and positive and negative predictive values of 100%. Urologists could not readily distinguish between low- and high-grade papillary urothelial lesions and were frequently unable to determine if a tumor was invasive, particularly if the degree of invasion was microscopic. Endoscopic impression at the time of bladder biopsy or resection is accurate and discriminates between the presence and absence of cancer. Endoscopic impression alone is a relatively poor staging tool with respect to extent of invasive disease and must be coupled with careful histopathologic analysis of biopsy material, bimanual examination when appropriate, and axial imaging for complete assessment of a given tumor.

AB - There is a paucity of information in the contemporary literature that would permit assessment of the urologist's ability to endoscopically discriminate between benign and malignant lesions of the bladder or to predict the grade and stage of papillary neoplasms. This prospective study evaluates the correlation between cystoscopic impression of urothelial lesions and final histologic diagnoses. Sixty-four patients with 68 urothelial abnormalities requiring formal biopsy or endoscopic resection were evaluated prospectively. At the time of endoscopy, treating urologists completed questionnaires documenting the surgeon's endoscopic impression of disease type and extent and performed standard biopsy or resection of all suspicious lesions. Specimens were submitted for routine histopathologic analysis, and the results were correlated with the questionnaire data. Endoscopic evaluation correctly discriminated between dysplastic/malignant and benign/reactive lesions in this study with a sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 100%, and positive and negative predictive values of 100%. Urologists could not readily distinguish between low- and high-grade papillary urothelial lesions and were frequently unable to determine if a tumor was invasive, particularly if the degree of invasion was microscopic. Endoscopic impression at the time of bladder biopsy or resection is accurate and discriminates between the presence and absence of cancer. Endoscopic impression alone is a relatively poor staging tool with respect to extent of invasive disease and must be coupled with careful histopathologic analysis of biopsy material, bimanual examination when appropriate, and axial imaging for complete assessment of a given tumor.

KW - Biopsy

KW - Bladder

KW - Cystoscopy

KW - Histology

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0034961299&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0034961299&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1053/hupa.2001.24999

DO - 10.1053/hupa.2001.24999

M3 - Article

VL - 32

SP - 630

EP - 637

JO - Human Pathology

JF - Human Pathology

SN - 0046-8177

IS - 6

ER -