A clinicopathological approach to cystitis — recommendations for simplified pathology reporting

• Published in: British Journal of Urology 1997-04, Vol.79 (4), p.567-571
• Main Authors: THILAGARAJAH, R., VALE, J.A., WITHEROW, R.O’N., WALKER, M.M.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Biological and medical sciences; Biopsy - standards; Chronic cystitis; Chronic Disease; classification; Cystitis - pathology; Female; Humans; Male; Medical Records - standards; Medical sciences; Middle Aged; Nephrology. Urinary tract diseases; reporting; Sensitivity and Specificity; Urinary Bladder - pathology; Urinary system involvement in other diseases. Miscellaneous; Urinary tract. Prostate gland
• ISSN: 0007-1331; 1464-410X
• DOI: 10.1046/j.1464-410X.1997.00031.x

Objective  To assess the accuracy of histopathology reports of bladder biopsy specimens showing chronic cystitis and to develop a standard method of reporting in the form of a template which will aid both clinician and patient in the management of this condition. Materials and methods  Over a 4‐year period, the reports of 134 bladder biopsy specimens diagnosed as chronic inflammation of the bladder were examined for clinical details, cystoscopy findings, pathology details and conclusions. Within each of these groups, the common terms were assessed for their relevance to the final outcome. Results  The analysis of each part of these reports revealed no clinical details in 33%, no cystoscopy details in 26% and no histopathology conclusion in 20%. The commonest terms used were: macroscopic haematuria (25%) for clinical details; red patch/inflamed (40%) for cystoscopic details; morphological site involved (65%) for pathology details; and mild chronic cystitis (37%) for the conclusions. Standardized criteria were devised and after reassessing the reports, 75% were considered to be accurate and complete. Conclusions  Overall, the histopathology reports examined were more than adequate for the clinicians’ use but the spectrum of details provided did not add to the usefulness of the final report. By limiting the terms available, a more standardized report can be produced, benefiting both clinician and patient.