[Cystoscopic impression versus histologic diagnosis in bladder tumors. Do they coincide?]. / La impresión cistoscópica frente al diagnóstico histológico en los tumores vesicales. Coinciden?

OBJECTIVE: How quality control in a university hospital and immediatly after to resents publications; we planed to evaluation of the correlation of cystoscopy impression with the histologic diagnosis after of transurethral resection (TUR). MATERIAL AND METHODS: To give more truthfulness to the study, we requested to all department member's, that to base in your experience to describe the endoscopic characteristic of the next bladder tumors groups: superficial and low-grade GI-II Ta, superficial and high-grade GIII Ta and high grade and/or T1-< T2. In a total of 172 patients, we evaluated the initial cystoscopy impression and we to compared it with histologic diagnosis after to TUR. RESULTS: In 172 tumors the cystoscopy classifed in 69 cases how superficial and low grade GI-II Ta-T1, 40 how superficial and high grade and 55 how high grade and/or invasive tumors GIII T1-< T2. When, we compared it with the histologic diagnosis, the cystoscopy to coincided in 46 de 69 cases (66.6%) (PNS) with the group of low-grade GI-II Ta-T1 in 13 of 40 (32.5%) (P < 0.005) with the group of superficial high grade GIII Ta and 45 of 51 (88.2%) (PNS) with the group of GIII T1 and/or invasive tumors. In 15 of 172 the endoscopic description its not conclusive. And finally in 12 cases the histologic diagnosis were normal. CONCLUSIONS: In order of this results, we to consider that in a university hospital is essential the histologic diagnosis before any therapeutic decision, because the initial cystoscopy impression have a low correlation with the histologic diagnosis. We are disagreement with recent publication that propose the outpatient cystoscopy with fulguration to base only to the cystoscopy impression.