Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2021 Feb 16;19(1):46-58.
doi: 10.1080/2090598X.2021.1883810.

Diagnostic ureteroscopy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma: friend or foe?

Angelo Territo  1 , Andrea Gallioli  1 , Iacopo Meneghetti  1 , Matteo Fontana  1 , Jordi Huguet  1 , Joan Palou  1 , Alberto Breda  1
Affiliations
Review

Diagnostic ureteroscopy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma: friend or foe?

Angelo Territo et al. Arab J Urol. .

Abstract

Introduction: The European Association of Urology guidelines recommend offering kidney-sparing surgery (KSS) as a primary treatment option to patients with low-risk tumours. Cystoscopy, urinary cytology, and computed tomography urography (CTU) do not always allow correct disease staging and grading, and sometimes there is even a lack of certainty regarding the diagnosis of UTUC. Diagnostic ureteroscopy (d-URS) may therefore be of crucial importance within the diagnostic framework and fundamental in establishing the appropriate therapeutic approach.

Evidence acquisition and synthesis: A systematic review of the literature was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Risk of bias was assessed using Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of interventions (ROBINS-I). Overall, from 3791 identified records, 186 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility. Finally, after a quantitative review of the selected literature, with the full agreement of all authors, 62 studies were considered relevant for this review.

Results: CTU has a sensitivity and specificity for UTUC of 92% and 95% respectively, but is not able to detect small or flat lesions with adequate accuracy. The sensitivity of voided urinary cytology for UTUC is around 67-76% and ranges from 43% to 78% for selective ureteric urine collection. As no technique offers a diagnosis of certainty, d-URS can allow an increase in diagnostic accuracy. In the present review the pros and cons of d-URS were analysed. This technique may provide additional information in the selection of patients suitable for neoadjuvant chemotherapy or KSS, distinguishing between normal tissue and low- and high-grade UTUC thanks to the emerging technologies.

Conclusions: Information obtainable from d-URS and ureteroscopic-guided biopsy can prove extremely valuable when the diagnosis of UTUC is doubtful or KSS is being considered. Notwithstanding concerns remain regarding the potential risk of bladder recurrence, cancer dissemination, and/or delay in radical treatment.Abbreviations: CLE: confocal laser endomicroscopy; CSS: cancer-specific survival; CTU: CT urography; d-URS: diagnostic ureteroscopy; EAU: European Association of Urology; HR: hazard ratio; IMAGE1S: Storz professional imaging enhancement system; IVR: intravesical recurrence; KSS: kidney-sparing surgery; MFS: Metastasis-free survival; NAC: neoadjuvant chemotherapy; NBI: narrow-band imaging; OCT: optical coherence tomography; RFS: Recurrence-free survival; RNU: radical nephroureterectomy; ROBINS-I: Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of interventions; URS(-GB): Ureteroscopy(-guided biopsy); UTUC: upper tract urothelial carcinoma; UUT: upper urinary tract.

Keywords: Diagnostic biopsy; diagnosis; radical nephroureterectomy; upper tract urothelial carcinoma; ureteroscopy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
PRISMA diagram for study selection
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Rouprêt M, Babjuk M, Compérat E, et al. European Association of Urology Guidelines on Upper Urinary Tract Urothelial Carcinoma: 2017 Update. Eur Urol. 2018;73(1):111–122. - PubMed
    1. Seisen T, Peyronnet B, Dominguez-Escrig JL, et al. Oncologic Outcomes of Kidney-sparing Surgery Versus Radical Nephroureterectomy for Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma: a Systematic Review by the EAU Non-muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer Guidelines Panel. Eur Urol. 2016;70(6):1052–1068. - PubMed
    1. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, et al. The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: explanation and Elaboration. PLOS Med. 2009;6(7):e1000100. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Sterne JA, Hernán MA, Reeves BC, et al. ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ. 2016;355:i4919. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Janisch F, Shariat SF, Baltzer P, et al. Diagnostic performance of multidetector computed tomographic (MDCTU) in upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC): a systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Urol. 2020;38(5):1165–1175. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources