Testicular microlithiasis an ultrasound dilemma: survey of opinions regarding significance and management amongst UK ultrasound practitioners

Shetty, D. D.; Bailey, Alex; Freeman, Simon

doi:10.1259/bjr.20130603

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Given the debate about the association between microlithiasis and testicular neoplasia, there is no consensus on the care of patients with isolated (not associated with a tumor at diagnosis) microlithiasis (23,24). Some authors recommend surveillance imaging, testicular examination, or both, at varying frequencies, while others suggest that this is not needed (25).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Association between Testicular Microlithiasis and Testicular Neoplasia: Large Multicenter Study in a Pediatric Population

Trout¹,

Chow

McNamara

et al. 2017

Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To retrospectively define the strength of association between testicular microlithiasis and testicular neoplasia in a large geographically diverse pediatric population. Materials and Methods Retrospective review of scrotal ultrasonographic (US) examination reports and pathology specimens obtained between January 2000 and May 2014 at six academic pediatric hospitals in North America was performed. Reported cases were reviewed to confirm microlithiasis. Radiology and pathology data bases were searched for pathology-proven testicular tumors (benign or malignant germ cell or stromal tumors). Association strength (risk) was expressed in terms of odds ratios (ORs) with and without adjustment for fixed study site effects based on logistic regression. Results A total of 37 863 individuals underwent scrotal US during the study period. Mean age was 11.1 years ± 4.7 [standard deviation] in boys with microlithiasis and 9.1 years ± 5.9 in boys without microlithiasis (P < .001). Microlithiasis was confirmed in 2.90% of patients (1097 of 37 863; range, 1.61%-5.25% across sites). It was unilateral in 21.97% (241 of 1097) of patients and bilateral in 78.0% (856 of 1097). Tumor was identified in 4.64% (51 of 1097) of boys with microlithiasis and 0.33% (122 of 36 766) of boys without (unadjusted OR, 14.65; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 10.29, 20.84; adjusted OR, 14.19). Malignant germ cell tumors were identified in 2.8% (31 of 1097) of boys with microlithiasis and 0.12% (45 of 36 766) of boys without microlithiasis (unadjusted OR, 17.26; 95% CI: 11.8, 25.25; adjusted OR, 22.37). Sex cord-stromal tumors were identified in 0.46% (five of 1097) of boys with microlithiasis and 0.079% (29 of 36 766) of boys without (unadjusted OR, 5.8; 95% CI: 2.1, 16; adjusted OR, 6.39). Conclusion There is a strong association between testicular microlithiasis and primary testicular neoplasia in this pediatric population. RSNA, 2017.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Association between Testicular Microlithiasis and Testicular Neoplasia: Large Multicenter Study in a Pediatric Population

Trout¹,

Chow

McNamara

et al. 2017

Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This may be in part due to small patient populations and short length of follow-up, often a result of indifferent patient cooperation. There is no consensus opinion as to the benefit of US surveillance and as a consequence varied management of TM occurs [26]. The purpose of this study was to assess the requirement for US surveillance of patients with an incidental finding of TM by reviewing all men on a prospective follow-up programme for surveillance of TM in a symptomatic population in a single centre and documenting the development of any tumours.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Testicular Microlithiasis: Is Sonographic Surveillance Necessary? Single Centre 14 Year Experience in 442 Patients with Testicular Microlithiasis

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…10). Understandably this has led to confusion regarding the significance of TM as an incidental finding in scrotal US (Shetty et al 2014).…”

Section: Testicular Calcificationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Incidental Findings and How to Manage Them: Testis— A WFUMB Position Paper

Lewicki

Freeman

Jędrzejczyk

et al. 2021

Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Testicular incidentalomas are non-palpable, asymptomatic lesions, most frequently detected on ultrasound examinations. Each incidentaloma should undergo a standardized diagnostic workup to exclude malignancy and recognize other potentially significant non-malignant conditions that may first present with an incidental finding on scrotal ultrasound. This position statement of the World Federation of Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology (WFUMB) summarizes the available evidence on management of testicular incidentalomas and describes efficient management strategies with particular reference to the role of ultrasound techniques.

show abstract

Testicular microlithiasis an ultrasound dilemma: survey of opinions regarding significance and management amongst UK ultrasound practitioners

Cited by 7 publications

References 34 publications

Association between Testicular Microlithiasis and Testicular Neoplasia: Large Multicenter Study in a Pediatric Population

Association between Testicular Microlithiasis and Testicular Neoplasia: Large Multicenter Study in a Pediatric Population

Testicular Microlithiasis: Is Sonographic Surveillance Necessary? Single Centre 14 Year Experience in 442 Patients with Testicular Microlithiasis

Incidental Findings and How to Manage Them: Testis— A WFUMB Position Paper

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About