Conventional liquid-based techniques versus Cytyc Thinprep® processing of urinary samples: a qualitative approach

Piaton, Éric; Faÿnel, J; Hutin, Karine; Ranchin, Marie-Claude; Cottier, Michèle

doi:10.1186/1472-6890-5-9

BMC Clin Pathol

2005

DOI: 10.1186/1472-6890-5-9

|View full text |Cite

Conventional liquid-based techniques versus Cytyc Thinprep® processing of urinary samples: a qualitative approach

Éric Piaton

J Faÿnel

Karine Hutin

et al.

Abstract: Background: The aim of our study was to objectively compare Cytyc Thinprep ® and other methods of obtaining thin layer cytologic preparations (cytocentrifugation, direct smearing and Millipore ® filtration) in urine cytopathology.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Year Published

2008

2017

Publication Types

Select...

Article5

Relationship

Self Cite0

Independent5

Authors

Journals

Cited by 34 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This limitation aside, however, urinary cytology detects *80% of aggressive, high-grade urothelial tumors. 4 In view of this, urinary cytology, in conjunction with cystoscopy, has played a large role in the diagnosis and monitoring of individuals with high-grade urothelial carcinoma, including the often clinically silent flat carcinoma in situ.Conventional methods of urine cytology have included cytocentrifugation, millipore filtration, and direct smearing. In the 1990s, liquid-based cytology (LBC) was developed as a replacement for the conventional methods, because of reported higher cell recovery rates and better cell preservation with LBCs.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Urinary cytology, however, has its limitations, with a mean sensitivity of only *50% for detecting urothelial carcinoma. 4 It is also hindered by many nondiagnostic samples. This limitation aside, however, urinary cytology detects *80% of aggressive, high-grade urothelial tumors.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The SurePath TM (BD-TriPath Imaging, Burlington, NC) is another thin-layer, LBC technique that is based on a sedimentation process. 4 In terms of urine cytological preparations, there have been many studies comparing the ThinPrep method with conventional methods of specimen processing. [4][5][6][7][8][9][10] However, there have been only a few studies comparing the SurePath TM technique with conventional methods of urinary cytological specimen processing.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

High‐grade urothelial carcinoma: Comparison of SurePath liquid‐based processing with cytospin processing

Nassar

Siddiqui

2008

Diagnostic Cytopathology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is limited literature available comparing SurePath (SP) with conventional cytospins (CS) for urine cytology specimens, especially urothelial carcinoma. In this study, urinary tract cytology cases of high-grade urothelial carcinoma were assessed on SP and CS slides. Also, the morphologic differences of highgrade urothelial carcinoma between SP and CS were evaluated on a total of 35 cases of high-grade urothelial carcinoma. SP showed that the tumor cells tend to present as threedimensional groups and have a smaller cell size than CS. In terms of nuclear features, SP and CS were found to be comparable in morphologic assessment of the tumor cells, with CS providing a slightly better visualization. Diagn. Cytopathol. 2009; 37:16-20. ' 2008 Wiley-Liss, Inc.Key Words: SurePath; cytospin; urine cytology; urothelial carcinoma Urinary bladder cancer is the seventh most common malignancy worldwide.1 In the United States specifically, more than 60,000 new cases of bladder cancer are diagnosed annually, with *13,000 deaths every year.2 The vast majority of these cancers are urothelial carcinomas, the incidence of which has been steadily increasing over the past several years. 3Urothelial carcinoma screening has relied in large part on cytology of the urinary tract. Urinary cytology, however, has its limitations, with a mean sensitivity of only *50% for detecting urothelial carcinoma. 4 It is also hindered by many nondiagnostic samples. This limitation aside, however, urinary cytology detects *80% of aggressive, high-grade urothelial tumors. 4 In view of this, urinary cytology, in conjunction with cystoscopy, has played a large role in the diagnosis and monitoring of individuals with high-grade urothelial carcinoma, including the often clinically silent flat carcinoma in situ.Conventional methods of urine cytology have included cytocentrifugation, millipore filtration, and direct smearing. In the 1990s, liquid-based cytology (LBC) was developed as a replacement for the conventional methods, because of reported higher cell recovery rates and better cell preservation with LBCs. The ThinPrep 1 (Hologic, Marlborough, MA) is a thin-layer, LBC method based on a filtration process and a computer-assisted thin-layer deposition of cells. The SurePath TM (BD-TriPath Imaging, Burlington, NC) is another thin-layer, LBC technique that is based on a sedimentation process. 4 In terms of urine cytological preparations, there have been many studies comparing the ThinPrep method with conventional methods of specimen processing.4-10 However, there have been only a few studies comparing the SurePath TM technique with conventional methods of urinary cytological specimen processing. 9,11,12 In this study, the authors have compared the morphologic features of high-grade urothelial carcinoma on SP and cytospins (CS) slides. Materials and MethodsSince January 2006, all urinary tract cytological specimens at our institution were divided equally for the preparation of 1 CS slide and 1 SP slide. The CS slides were prepared by cytocentrifugation ...

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

High‐grade urothelial carcinoma: Comparison of SurePath liquid‐based processing with cytospin processing

Nassar

Siddiqui

2008

Diagnostic Cytopathology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Comparison between cytospin and liquid‐based cytology in urine specimens classified according to the Paris System for Reporting Urinary Cytology

Straccia

Bizzarro

Fadda

et al. 2016

Cancer Cytopathology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND:The current study compared ThinPrep urinary cytology and conventional cytospin urinary cytology in the diagnosis of bladder cancer, applying the Paris System for Reporting Urinary Cytology. METHODS: Between January 2010and December 2011, a total of 3659 urine samples were processed using conventional cytospin methods. Between January 2012 and December 2013, a total of 4186 urine cytological cases were analyzed using ThinPrep methods. In 131 cases (65 processed by conventional cytospin and 66 processed by ThinPrep), a subsequent biopsy was performed. The authors reclassified these cases according to the Paris System and an analysis between the 2 methods with regard to bladder biopsies was performed. RESULTS: No significant differences were observed in terms of sensitivity and specificity between the 2 methods in cases with positive cytology for high-grade carcinoma. According to the Paris System, cases of atypical urothelial cells (AUC) and atypical urothelial cells suspicious for high-grade carcinoma (AUC-H) that were processed using cytospin did not correlate with urothelial carcinoma or with negative biopsies; conversely, the AUC cases processed using ThinPrep appeared to correlate with negative histological biopsies or low-grade urothelial carcinoma. CONCLUSIONS:The results of the current study demonstrated that according to the Paris System, there were no significant differences in sensitivity or specificity for the diagnosis of high-grade urothelial carcinoma or AUC-H between the 2 methods. Cases of AUC should be easy to recognize using Thin Prep rather than cytospin and only AUCs diagnosed with ThinPrep were found to be statistically linked to negative cases for carcinoma or with low-grade urothelial carcinoma.

show abstract

Comparison of ThinPrep UroCyte and cytospin slide preparations for gastrointestinal specimens: Evaluation and retrospective performance review

Smith¹,

Chadwick²,

Adler³

et al. 2010

Diagnostic Cytopathology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gastrointestinal (GI) tract cytology has high specificity but poor sensitivity for detecting GI tract cancer. Newer methods of slide preparation may improve cytology performance and additionally permit molecular slide-based assays that could improve diagnostic accuracy. A split-sample validation study compared slides prepared using ThinPrep UroCyte filters or a cytocentrifuge method with respect to cellularity, stain quality, and interpretation. In this 15-slide split-sample study, UroCyte slide preparations were judged to be superior to cytocentrifuge preparations, and the method was implemented for GI cytology in December 2006. To assess diagnostic performance for GI cytology, we retrospectively reviewed outcomes for one year before and after implementation of UroCyte filter slide preparation. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for both slide preparations were largely equivalent to one another and compared favorably with values in the literature, but varied greatly depending on how atypical and suspicious-atypical cases were defined for calculations. For biopsied biliary samples, the highest sensitivities were observed when all atypical and suspicious-atypical cases were considered positive for malignancy, but were lower when suspicious-atypical cases were considered positive and atypical cases were considered negative for malignancy. This highlights the difficulty with comparing studies that define atypical classes differently, and points to the need for a well-defined approach to performance evaluation that relates directly to how diagnostic information is used clinically. We conclude that the UroCyte filter slide preparation is valid for evaluation of GI cytology specimens and may simplify adjunct molecular testing such as FISH. This is the first reported use of UroCyte filters for preparation of GI specimens.

show abstract

scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.

Contact Info

customersupport@researchsolutions.com

10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614

Henderson, NV 89052, USA

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Blog Terms and Conditions API Terms Privacy Policy Contact Cookie Preferences Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Made with 💙 for researchers

Part of the Research Solutions Family.

Conventional liquid-based techniques versus Cytyc Thinprep® processing of urinary samples: a qualitative approach

Abstract: Background: The aim of our study was to objectively compare Cytyc Thinprep ® and other methods of obtaining thin layer cytologic preparations (cytocentrifugation, direct smearing and Millipore ® filtration) in urine cytopathology.

Cited by 34 publications

References 12 publications

High‐grade urothelial carcinoma: Comparison of SurePath liquid‐based processing with cytospin processing

High‐grade urothelial carcinoma: Comparison of SurePath liquid‐based processing with cytospin processing

Comparison between cytospin and liquid‐based cytology in urine specimens classified according to the Paris System for Reporting Urinary Cytology

Comparison of ThinPrep UroCyte and cytospin slide preparations for gastrointestinal specimens: Evaluation and retrospective performance review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About