Condyloma Acuminatum of the Urinary Tract Demonstrates Atypical Squamous Cells in Urine Cytology

Jaylou M. Velez Torres,Jianping Zhao,Jonathan I. Epstein,Oleksandr N. Kryvenko
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humpath.2022.10.006
IF: 3.526
2022-01-01
Human Pathology
Abstract:Urine cytology of urinary tract condylomas has not been systematically studied. We analyzed cytologic features of urinary tract condylomas and evaluated potential diagnostic challenges and pitfalls. We retrospectively reviewed urine cytology of urinary tract condylomas from 2 academic institutions (2015-2022). Among 20 patients with urinary tract condylomas, 6 had urine cytology (2 samples in 1 patient), including 3 men and 3 women (mean age, 74.3 years; range, 65-86 years). Original interpretations were negative for high-grade urothelial carcinoma (NHGUC; n = 4), atypical urothelial cells (n = 1), reactive urothelial cells (n = 1), and negative for malignancy (n = 1). Squamous cells were noted in 3 cases, atypical squamous cells (ASC) consistent with low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL) were noted in 1 case, and in 3 cases, the presence of squamous cells was not mentioned. All urines were reclassified according to The Paris System as NHGUC. Specimens were composed of benign urothelial cells and groups or isolated ASC consistent with LSIL (n = 4), atypical keratinized squamous cells (n = 2), and ASC that did not meet LSIL criteria (n = 1). The LSIL cells showed nuclear enlargement (n = 4), hyperchromasia (n = 4), perinuclear halo (n = 3), nuclear membrane irregularity (n = 4), orangeophilic cytoplasm (n = 3), and binucleation (n = 4). The atypical keratinized squamous cells showed hyperchromasia (n = 2), nuclear membrane irregularity (n = 2), keratin pearls (n = 2), and binucleation (n = 1). The ASC that did not meet LSIL criteria showed nuclear enlargement and orangeophilic cytoplasm. Many urinary tract condylomas (57%) demonstrate classic LSIL features in urine cytology. Less frequent cases can mimic keratinizing squamous cell carcinoma (28%) or demonstrate ASC not diagnostic of LSIL
What problem does this paper attempt to address?