Zusammenfassung
Das Urothelkarzinom der Harnblase ist eine häufige Erkrankung, die durch Screening von Risikogruppen rechtzeitig erkannt werden kann. Aufgrund der hohen Rezidivrate sind regelmäßige und engmaschige Nachsorgeuntersuchungen notwendig. Die Diagnose sowie die Kontrolle erfolgen über die Zystoskopie, die durch verschiedene, nichtinvasive Verfahren wie die Zytologie und Urinmarkersysteme ergänzt wird. Diese weisen gegenüber der Zystoskopie bezüglich ihrer Sensitivität und Spezifität unterschiedliche Vor- und Nachteile auf, sodass sie zusätzliche Informationen liefern können, die Zystoskopie jedoch nicht ersetzen. Dabei bleibt die klassische Urinzytologie das nichtinvasive Standardverfahren.
Abstract
Urothelial carcinoma of the bladder is a frequent disease that can be identified timely by screening patients at high risk. Due to the high rate of disease recurrence, frequent follow-up procedures are necessary. For this purpose, cystoscopy is the standard procedure, and supplementary non-invasive procedures such as cytology or tumor marker tests are used. These tests have different advantages and disadvantages in terms of their sensitivities and specificities. Thus, they provide additional information, but are not able to replace cystoscopy as the standard instrument in the diagnosis of bladder cancer.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Literatur
Dey P (2004) Urinary markers of bladder carcinoma. Clin Chim Acta 340: 57–65
Glas AS, Roos D, Deutekom M et al. (2003) Tumor markers in the diagnosis of primary bladder cancer. A systematic review. J Urol 169: 1975–1982
Glatz K, Willi N, Glatz D et al. (2006) An international telecytologic quiz on urinary cytology reveals educational deficits and absence of a commonly used classification system. Am J Clin Pathol 126: 294–301
Hernandez S, Lopez-Knowles E, Lloreta J et al. (2006) Prospective study of FGFR3 mutations as a pronostic factor in nonmuscle invasive urothelial cancer. J Clin Oncol 24: 3664–3671
Jocham D, Witjes F, Wagner S et al. (2005) Improved detection and treatment of bladder cancer using hexaminolevulinate imaging: a prospective, phase III multicenter study. J Urol 174: 862–866
Koss LG, Deitch D, Ramanathan R, Sherman AB (1985) Diagnostic value of cytology of voided urine. Acta Cytol 29: 810–816
Lipinsky M, Jeromin L (2002) Comparison of the bladder tumor antigen test with photodynamic diagnosis in patients with pathologically confirmed recurrent superficial urinary bladder tumors. BJU Int 89: 757–759
Lodde M, Mian C, Comploj E et al. (2006) uCyt+ test: alternative to cystoscopy for less-invasive follow-up of patients with low risk of urothelial carcinoma. Urology 67: 950–954
Lokeshwar VB, Obek C, Pham HT et al. (2000) Urinary hyaluronic acid and hyaluronidase: markers for bladder cancer detection and evaluation grade. J Urol 163: 348–356
Lotan Y, Roehrborn CG (2002) Cost-effectiveness of a modified care protocol substituting bladder tumor markers for cystoscopy for the followup of patients with transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder: a decision analytical protocol. J Urol 167: 75–79
Lotan Y, Roehrborn CG (2003) Sensitivity and specificity of commonly available bladder tumor markers versus cytology: results of a comprehensive literature review and meta-analyses. Urology 61: 109–118
Mian C, Lodde M, Comploj E et al. (2006) Multiprobe fluorescence in situ hybridisation: prognostic perspectives in superficial bladder cancer. J Clin Pathol 59: 984–987
Murphy WM (1990) Current status of urinary cytology in the evaluation of bladder neoplasms. Hum Pathol 21: 868–896
Planz B, Jochims E, Deix T et al. (2005) The role of urinary cytology for detection of bladder cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 31: 304–308
Raitanen M, Aine R, Rintala E et al. (2002) Differences between local and review cytology in diagnosis of bladder cancer. An interobserver multicenter analysis. Eur Urol 41: 284–289
Sarosdy MF, Schellhammer P, Bokinsky G et al. (2002) Clinical evaluation of a multi-target fluorescence in situ hybridization assay for detection of bladder cancer. J Urol 168: 1950–1954
Tritschler S, Scharf S, Karl A et al. (2006) Validation of the diagnostic value of NMP22(r) BladderChek(r) test as a marker for bladder cancer by photodynamic diagnosis. Eur Urol 15 [Epub ahead of print]
Van Rhijn BW, Lurkin I, Chopin DK et al. (2003) Combined microsatellite and FGFR3 mutation analysis enables a high sensitive detection of urothelial cell carcinoma in voided urine. Clin Cancer Res 9: 257–263
Van Rhijn BW, Van der Poel HG, Van der Kwast TH (2005) Urine markers for bladder cancer surveillance: a systematic review. Eur Urol 47: 736–748
Zaak D, Karl A, Knuchel R et al. (2005) Diagnosis of urothelial carcinoma of the bladder using fluorescence endoscopy. BJU Int 96: 217–222
Interessenkonflikt
Es besteht kein Interessenkonflikt. Der korrespondierende Autor versichert, dass keine Verbindungen mit einer Firma, deren Produkt in dem Artikel genannt ist, oder einer Firma, die ein Konkurrenzprodukt vertreibt, bestehen. Die Präsentation des Themas ist unabhängig und die Darstellung der Inhalte produktneutral.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Tritschler, S., Zaak, D., Knuechel, R. et al. Urinzytologie und Urinmarker. Urologe 45, 1441–1448 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-006-1217-1
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-006-1217-1