XXXX : evidence of origin in the testis.

@entity1 @entity82 @entity2971 @entity5 @entity3202 @entity1463
BACKGROUND: The origin of extragonadal @entity2971 remains controversial. Whether they develop primarily in the retroperitoneum or whether they are metastases of a primary @entity5 has long been debated. @entity1 AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 26 @entity1 treated as having primary extragonadal @entity2971 based upon the findings of testicular palpation by the referring physician. Testicular evaluation was then extended with ultrasonographical and histological examinations. RESULTS: Biopsy of the @entity5 was performed in 25 @entity1 , confirming diagnosis of @entity2971 . Prior to treatment @entity1 were clinically evaluated by several physicians and the testes were not considered suspicious for @entity5 . At urological workup, testes were found to be @entity3202 and/or indurated in 14 (54%) @entity1 , enlarged in one (4%) and unremarkable in 11 (42%). Ultrasound examination of the testes in 20 @entity1 showed pathological findings in all of them. Histology of the testis was available in 25 of 26 @entity1 and revealed @entity5 in three, intratubular germ cell @entity5 in four, scar tissue in 12, @entity1463 in three, @entity1463 and @entity82 in one, and @entity82 alone in two. CONCLUSIONS: So-called primary extragonadal germ cell @entity5 in the retroperitoneum are very likely a rare or non-existing entity and should be considered as metastases of a viable or burned-out @entity5 until proven otherwise. All of our @entity1 with histologically examined testes had pathological finding, 76% of which were either viable @entity5 or scars.
