Prognostic Value of Inverted Papilloma of the Urinary Tract.
10.4111/kju.2006.47.10.1103
- Author:
Kyung Sik SEO
1
;
Young Soo KIM
;
Se Joong KIM
Author Information
1. Department of Urology, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Korea. sejoong@ajou.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Urinary tract;
Inverted papilloma;
Transitional cell carcinoma
- MeSH:
Carcinoma, Transitional Cell;
Female;
Follow-Up Studies;
Hematuria;
Humans;
Male;
Neck;
Papilloma, Inverted*;
Prostatic Hyperplasia;
Recurrence;
Retrospective Studies;
Urinary Bladder;
Urinary Tract*;
Urologic Diseases
- From:Korean Journal of Urology
2006;47(10):1103-1106
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the tumor biologic behavior and prognostic value of inverted papilloma (IP) of the urinary tract. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-one cases (27 males and 4 females, mean age 55.2 years) of urinary IP that were treated at a single center were retrospectively reviewed. There were 21 cases with bladder IP only (group 1), 8 cases with bladder IP and transitional cell carcinoma (TCC) within a single neoplasm (group 2), and 2 cases with IP and TCC in a different location (group 3). The patient and tumor characteristics were analyzed. RESULTS: There was a male predominance with hematuria being the main presenting symptom in all groups. The most common macroscopic feature of IP was a polypoid lesion in group 1. The most common location of IP was bladder neck (57.1%) in group 1 and lateral bladder wall (75%) in group 2. The most common associated urologic disease was benign prostatic hyperplasia in group 1. Transurethral resection was performed in 30 cases (96.8%). There were no recurrences at a mean follow-up of 19.4 (3-68) months after surgery in 27 cases followed for 3 months or longer. CONCLUSIONS: One-third of urinary IP were associated with TCC within a single neoplasm or in a different location, and this suggests that IP has a malignant potential. However, because there was no recurrence in IP of the urinary tract, a surveillance protocol as frequent as the one suggested for urothelial cancer does not seem to be necessary.
