Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging

, Volume 52, Issue 5, pp 377–379 | Cite as

Incremental Role of 18FDG PET/CT in Assessment of Testicular Viability

  • Venkata Subramanian Krishnaraju
  • Dharmender Malik
  • Rajender Kumar
  • Giridhar S. Bora
  • Bhagwant Rai MittalEmail author
  • Anish Bhattacharya
Case Report


Testicular torsion is a common differential diagnosis of acute scrotal pain along with acute epididymo-orchitis, which may lead to testicular non-viability. Doppler ultrasound and testicular scintigraphy are two routinely used modalities for the assessment of testicular viability. However, in some cases, these investigations may prove inadequate in differentiating between the two entities with widely differing management. Here, we present a case of a 52-year-old male with questionable viability of testis, who was investigated initially using testicular scintigraphy and was further subjected to a regional 18F-FDG PET/CT scan, in view of inconclusive findings with the conventional modalities.


Testicular infarction Testicular viability Acute epididymo-orchitis Testicular scintigraphy 18F-FDG PET/CT 


Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

Venkata Subramanian Krishnaraju, Dharmender Malik, Rajender Kumar Basher, Giridhar S Bora, Bhagwant Rai Mittal, and Anish Bhattacharya declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. For this type of study, formal consent is not required.

Informed Consent

The institutional review board of our institute approved this retrospective study, and the requirement to obtain informed consent was waived.


  1. 1.
    Gordhan CG, Sadeghi-Nejad H. Scrotal pain: evaluation and management. Korean J Urol. 2015;56:3–11.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cummings JM, Boullier JA, Sekhon D, Bose K. Adult testicular torsion. J Urol. 2002;167:2109–10.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Matteson JR, Stock JA, Hanna MK, et al. Medicolegal aspects of testicular torsion. Urology. 2001;57:783.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Davenport M. ABC of general surgery in children. Acute problems of the scrotum. BMJ. 1996;312:435–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ringdahl E, Teague L. Testicular torsion. Am Fam Physician. 2006;74:1739–43.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Vieras F, Kuhn CR. Nonspecificity of the “rim sign” in the scintigraphic diagnosis of missed testicular torsion. Radiology. 1983;146:519–22.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Vordermark JS, Favila MQ. Testicular necrosis: a preventable complication of epididymitis. J Urol. 1982;128:1322–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sue SR, Pelucio M, Gibbs M. Testicular infarction in a patient with epididymitis. AcadEmerg Med. 1998;5:1128–30.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wu H, Sun S, Kao A, Chuang F-J, Lin C, Lee C. Comparison of radionuclide imaging and ultrasonography in the differentiation of acute testicular torsion and inflammatory testicular disease. Clin Nucl Med. 2002;27:490–3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Santhosh S, Guha P, Bhattacharya A, Bawa M, Mittal BR. False-positive “halo” sign on testicular scintigraphy in a 5-year-old boy with epididymitis and hydrocele. Indian J Nucl Med. 2011;26:159–60.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Korean Society of Nuclear Medicine 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Nuclear MedicinePostgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER)ChandigarhIndia
  2. 2.Department of UrologyPostgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER)ChandigarhIndia

Personalised recommendations