Scrotal Operation or Biopsy of Testicular Tumors — A Fatal Mistake?

  • A. Sigel
  • F. Krieger
Part of the Recent Results in Cancer Research book series (RECENTCANCER, volume 60)

Abstract

The operative treatment of testicular tumors fails for two reasons. The chief reason is that for many physicians the existence and the deadly significance of this disease is too little known. For this reason, the interval between the first medical consultation and surgery is 4–5 months on the average. Ten years ago, it was 6–8 months. The second reason — our topic — is the improper surgical approach. The scrotal operation always appears easier and more direct. However, it carries the risk of a deadly complication that the proper approach, the inguinal one, completely avoids. It is estimated that one-quarter to one-third of all testicular tumors are not properly excised.

Keywords

Testicular Tumor Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Tunica Albuginea Testis Tumor Chief Reason 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Bowles, W.T.: Inguinal node metastases from testicular tumor developing after varicocelectomy. J. Urol. (Baltimore) 88, 266–267 (1972)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Busch, F.M., Sayegh, E.S.: Roentgenographic visualization of human testicular lymphatics: A preliminary report. J. Urol. (Baltimore) 89, 106–110 (1963)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Busch, F.M., Sayegh, E.S., Chenault, O.W., Jr.: Some uses of lymphagiograph in the management of testicular tumors. J. Urol. (Baltimore) 93, 490–495 (1965)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chiappa, S., Uslenghi, C., Bonadonna, G., Marano, P., Rarasi, G.: Combined testicular and foot lymphagiography in testicular carcinomas. Surg. Gynec. Obstet. 123, 10–14 (1966)PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cooper, J.F., Leadbetter, W.F., Chute, R.: The thoracoabdominal approach for retroperitoneal gland dissection: Its application to testis tumors. Surg. Gynec. Obstet. 90, 486–496 (1950)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gibert, P.: Intra-organ Lymphagiogram. J. Urol. (Baltimore) 96, 394–396 (1966)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    GRAY’s Anatomy, 25th ed. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger, 1948Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jamieson, J.K., Dobson, J.F.: The lymphatics of the testicle. Lancet (1910), 493–495Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lewis, L.G.: Radioresistant testis tumors: Results in 133 cases; Five year follow-up. J. Urol. (Baltimore) 69, 841–848 (1953)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    MOST: Über maligne Hodengeschwülste and ihre Metastasen. Wirchow’s Archiv path. Anat. 154, 138–177 (1898)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sayegh, E.S., Brooks, T., Sacher, E., Busch, F.M.: Lymphagiography of the retroperitoneal lymph nodes through the inguinal route. J. Urol. (Baltimore) 95, 102–107 (1966)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sterns, E.E.: Current concepts of lymphatic transport. Surg. Gynec. Obstet. 138, 779 (1974)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Taylor, G.W., Nathanson, I.T.: Lymph node metastases. London: Oxford University Press, 1942Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wallace, S., Jackson, L., Dodd, G.D., Greening, R.R.: Lymphatic dynamics in certain abnormal states. Amer. J. Roentgenol. 91, 1187–1206 (1964)PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Witus, W.S., Sloss, J.H., Valk, W.L.: Inguinal node metastases from testicular tumors developing after orchiopexy. J. Urol. (Baltimore) 81, 669–671 (1959)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1977

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Sigel
  • F. Krieger

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations