Correlation between the cytology of urine sediment in fresh sample and smears stained by Papanicolaou and Giemsa methods

von Hansemann Cells from Fresh Urine Sediment Samples in the Diagnosis of Malakoplakia

Background

Malakoplakia is characterized by the presence of plaques with macrophages containing inclusion bodies. The diagnosis of this disease is carried out by biopsy of the lesion. The objective of this paper was to assess the value of fresh urine sediment in the diagnosis of malakoplakia.

Materials and Methods

Five suspected cases of malakoplakia that showed macrophages with inclusions called bodies of Michaelis-Gutmann (von Hansemann cells) in unstained urine sediment were processed with Papanicolaou, Giemsa, and periodic acid-Schiff (PAS) stains. Four of the five patients had a history of cystitis and had developed antibiotic resistance. The other patient had the characteristics cells in a routine urinalysis.

Results

Papanicolaou stain revealed intracytoplasmic eosinophilic or basophilic bodies, single or multiple in macrophages. Such bodies were stained deep red with PAS technique. Giemsa stain showed these bodies with a faint basophilic coloration, sometimes with a central core. Bladder biopsies established the definitive diagnosis, showing bodies within and outside macrophages, with a concentric "birds-eye" or "owl-eye" (targetoid) appearance.

Conclusions

Finding of von Hansemann cells in fresh urine sediment of patients with cystitis and a history of resistance to antibiotic scan leads to the diagnosis of malakoplakia. Giemsa stain can show in some cases the characteristic central core of Michaelis-Gutmann bodies. Malakoplakia is probably the result of an acquired defect in macrophage function causing impairment of bactericidal activity. A correct diagnosis is important because the spread to ureters with bilateral stenosis and obstruction can lead to kidney failure.

Automated urinalysis with expert review for incidental identification of atypical urothelial cells: An anticipated bladder carcinoma diagnosis

BACKGROUND

The most common diagnostic technique for the detection of malignant/atypical urothelial cells (m/AUC) is urinary cytology (Ucytol). Urinary sediment (Used) examination, often prescribed for asymptomatic, healthy subjects, can incidentally identify suspicious/AUC (s/AUC) in routine daily practice.

METHODS

Unstained, unfixed and uncentrifuged urine samples were analyzed with an automated intelligent microscopy (AIM) system. From January 2010, any incidental identification of s/AUC through expert revision of unclassified cell images was reported, according to internal protocols, as an additional note on the patients' laboratory report. Patients' symptomatology or previous history was unknown to the pathologist. All referrals from January 2010 to December 2014, with the s/AUC note, were reviewed and cross-referenced with Ucytol and histology data from a central database.

RESULTS

Of the 162 patients identified with s/AUC (0.1/1000 samples), 84% (n=136) performed further Ucytol and/or histological examinations. The sensitivity of the identification of non-transitory AUC at Used was 87.5%. Positive histological examinations were 91.2% classified as high-grade urothelial carcinoma.

CONCLUSIONS

Routine Used examination, with an AIM and expert revision, can identify the presence of AUC in a clinical laboratory setting, and for some subjects, may anticipate bladder carcinoma diagnosis.