Be cautious of “complex hydrocele” on ultrasound in young men

Submitted: September 30, 2019
Accepted: December 23, 2019
Published: April 7, 2020
Abstract Views: 1639
PDF: 4852
Publisher's note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Authors

Hydrocele is the most common benign cause of painless scrotal enlargement and only very rarely can be reactive to an underlying testicular tumor. We present the case of a healthy young man, complaining of mild left scrotal discomfort and swelling. Physical examination revealed a non-tender fluctuant left scrotum and serum tumor markers were normal. Scrotal ultrasonography (US) showed a normal right hemiscrotum and testicle and a fluid collection among thickened irregular septations in the left hemiscrotum, a finding which was considered as a complex hydrocele. Intraoperatively the presumed “complex hydrocele” was in fact a multicystic testicular tumor. We proceeded with orchiectomy through the scrotal incision and pathology revealed a mixed germ cell tumor of the testis consisting of cystic teratoma, in situ germ cell neoplasia unclassified (IGCNU) and Sertoli cell tumor. This is the first reported case of this type of testis tumor presenting as complex hydrocele. The aim of this case presentation is to underline the need for an accurate preoperative diagnosis in cases of suspected scrotal pathology in young males.

Dimensions

Altmetric

PlumX Metrics

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Citations

How to Cite

Symeonidis, E. N., Sountoulides, P., Asouhidou, I., Gkekas, C., Tsifountoudis, I., Tsantila, I., Symeonidis, A., Georgiadis, C., Malioris, A., & Papathanasiou, M. (2020). Be cautious of “complex hydrocele” on ultrasound in young men. Archivio Italiano Di Urologia E Andrologia, 92(1), 61–63. https://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2020.1.61