Dr Muktanjalee Deka, Dr Bonita Borah


Background: Urine cytology continues to be an important test for screening,diagnosis and monitoring of patient with urothelial carcinoma.It is
more specific for High grade urothelial cancers(HGUC) .Our objective is to compare the performance of The Paris System for Reporting Urine
Cytology with our institutional reporting system.
Materials and Methods :A cross sectional observational study was conducted over a period of one year from June 2018 to May 2019. A total of
315 urine specimen was studied from 120 patients who presented with hematuria and other urinary tract symptoms to the Department of Urology.
Cytological diagnosis was done by both The Paris System(TPS) and original institutional reporting system(ORS) and correlated with gold
standard histology.
Results and Observation: More cases were found to be under Negative for High Grade Urothelial Carcinoma (NHGUC) i.e. 37% by TPS VS 23% by
ORS, lower number of cases assigned as atypical category (AUC) using TPS ( 25% by TPS VS 39% by ORS),with regards to AUC category 56% cases
were subsequently diagnosed as HGUC using TPS compared to 26% by institutional reposting system. There was minimal difference in
performance of suspicious for high grade urothelial carcinoma (SHGUC) / high grade urothelial carcinoma (HGUC) using both the system .
Conclusion: The Paris System of reporting urine cytology has improved the performance of urine cytology by targeting the diagnosis of HGUC
which is clinically significant.


urine cytology , the Paris System for reporting urine cytology, urothelial carcinoma

Full Text:



. Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin [Internet]. 2018;68(6):394–424.

.Papanicolaou GN. Cytology of the urine sediment in neoplasms of the urinary tract. J Urol. 1947; 57: 375‐379

.Owens CL, Vandenbussche CJ, Burroughs FH, et al.A review of reporting systems and terminology fo rurine cytology. Cancer Cytopathol 2013;121:9–14.

Rosenthal DL, Wojcik EM. The Paris System for Reporting Urinary Cytology. The Paris System for Reporting Urinary Cytology. 2015.

Hassan M, Solanki S, Kassouf W, Kanber Y, Caglar D, Auger M, et al. Impact of Implementing the Paris System for Reporting Urine Cytology in the Performance of Urine Cytology. Am J Clin Pathol. 2016;146(3):384–90.

.VandenBussche CV.A review of the Paris system for reporting urine cytology.Cytopathology.2016;27:153-156.

Wang Y, Auger M, Kanber Y, Caglar D, Brimo F. Implementing The Paris System for Reporting Urinary Cytology results in a decrease in the rate of the “atypical” category and an increase in its prediction of subsequent high-grade urothelial carcinoma. Cancer Cytopathol. 2018;126(3):207–14.

Meilleroux J, Daniel G, Aziza J, d’Aure DM, Quintyn-Ranty ML, Basset CML, et al. One year of experience using the Paris System for Reporting Urinary Cytology. Cancer Cytopathol. 2018;126(6):430–6.

Malviya K, Fernandes G, Naik L, Kothari K, Agnihotri M. Utility of the Paris System in Reporting Urine Cytology. Acta Cytol. 2017;61(2):145–52. Granados R, Duarte JA, Corrales T, Camarmo E.

. Applying the Paris System for Reporting Urine Cytology Increases the Rate of Atypical Urothelial Cells in Benign Cases : A Need for Patient Management Recommendations. 2017;71–6.


  • There are currently no refbacks.