3.8 Article

Long-term Results of Patients with Testicular Tumors Undergoing Testis Sparing Surgery: A Single-center Experience

期刊

JOURNAL OF UROLOGICAL SURGERY
卷 6, 期 2, 页码 93-99

出版社

GALENOS YAYINCILIK
DOI: 10.4274/jus.galenos.2018.2345

关键词

Testicular tumor; Testis-sparing surgery; Orchiectomy; Frozen section; Organ-sparing treatment; Positive surgical margin

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To determine the clinicopathologic and oncologic outcomes of testis-sparing surgery (TSS) by evaluating the data of patients who underwent TSS in our clinic. Materials and Methods: A total of 24 patients (27 testes) who underwent TSS in the last 16 years were included in the study. All the patients presented with a solitary testicular mass or bilateral testicular mass. Preoperative tumor markers were investigated and scrotal ultrasonography was performed in all patients. Surgery was performed with inguinal incision, temporary clamping of the spermatic cord and frozen section analysis (FSA) of the lesion. Intraoperative data, histopathological findings, and recurrence status were analyzed. Results: The mean follow-up period was 96 months. The mean age of the patients was 29.7 (18-66) years. The mean tumor diameter was 11 mm (2-18). TSS was performed bilaterally in 3 patients and unilaterally in 24 patients. According to the final pathology report, 18 (66.7%) of the masses were benign and 9 (33.3%) were malignant. Intraoperative FSA was performed in 17 patients (70.8%). FSA revealed malign histopathology in 6 patients and complementary orchiectomy was performed in 4 of these patients. 14 patients (51.9%) were detected to have positive surgical margins. Two of these patients had seminoma diagnosis and radical orchiectomy was performed due to recurrence on follow-up in these patients. TSS was performed in all patients without any significant intra-postoperative complications. Conclusion: TSS may have significant functional and cosmetic benefits without worsening oncologic results in appropriately selected patients.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据