Handling and pathology reporting of specimens with carcinoma of the urinary bladder, ureter, and renal pelvis. A joint proposal of the European Society of Uropathology and the Uropathology Working Group.

Unit of Anatomic Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Avda. Menendez-Pidal S/N, 14004 Cordoba, Spain.
Archiv für Pathologische Anatomie und Physiologie und für Klinische Medicin (Impact Factor: 2.56). 09/2004; 445(2):103-10. DOI: 10.1007/s00428-004-1039-8
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Pathologists play a pivotal role in the diagnosis and in the report of the pathological features related to prognosis. To meet these endpoints, the following issues must be addressed: adequate information about the patient history, proper handling of the specimens, identification of the reliable histopathological techniques necessary to reach the more detailed diagnostic information and evaluation of the prognostic variables, and standardized pathological reporting. In this review we discuss a proposal for standardization of sampling and reporting of the urothelial tissues achieved within uropathology. The urologists have a great role in assisting pathologists in the proper examination by providing them with clinical information.

1 Bookmark
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This chapter reviews the clinical, macroscopic, and microscopic features, as well as the differential diagnosis of the most common lesions and tumors seen in a routine surgical pathology. It begins with common congenital anomalies. Benign lesions and mimics of cancer follow including entities such as fibroepithelial polyp, endometriosis, urethral inflammatory polyp, caruncle, urethral diverticulum, ectopic prostatic tissue, and idiopathic retroperitoneal fibrosis. This is followed by a review of neoplasms of the renal pelvis and ureter including benign urothelial neoplasms, flat urothelial lesions with atypia, urothelial carcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma, and adenocarcinoma. A review of common neoplasms of the urethra also includes benign epithelial tumors of the urethra, carcinoma of the urethra, squamous cell carcinoma of the urethra, and adenocarcinoma of the urethra. Applicable ancillary testing modalities including immunohistochemistry and other molecular findings are discussed.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The current protocol for reporting urinary bladder cancer in radical cystectomies may exhibit limitations in the diagnostic accuracy, such as a risk of understaging, especially in cases with prostatic involvement. Difficulty can arise in the verification of stage pT0, and the assessment of surgical margins is suboptimal. We have developed a daily gross dissection protocol practice where radical cystectomies are totally embedded and evaluated histologically in whole-mount sections. We report here on the first 138 consecutive specimens from 2008 to the first quarter of 2012 inclusive. The incidence of the cancer stages was compared with data on 15,586 radical cystectomies from the literature. The differences were analyzed with the one-sample z-test (p < 0.05). The following emerged from and our series and the literature data: pT0 8.7 % and 6.1 %; pTa 0.7 % and 2.9 %; pTis 2.9 % and 6 %; pT1 15.2 % and 15.5 %; pT2 21 % and 23.3 %; pT3 34.8 % and 34.3 %; and pT4 16.7 % and 11 %, respectively. Our findings closely reflected the means of the published statistical data based on a large number of cases. The differences were due to the more detailed processing: the case numbers in groups from pTis to pT2 were comparatively low, while those in groups pT3 and pT4 were higher. The difference in group pT4 was significant (p = 0.0494). With this method, only those samples were regarded as pT0 in which the granulomatous area and the hemosiderin deposition indicative of the earlier intervention were observable and the entire preparation was tumor-free.
    Pathology & Oncology Research 02/2014; DOI:10.1007/s12253-014-9748-z · 1.56 Impact Factor
  • Source


Available from
May 28, 2014