Ultrasonography of intrascrotal torsed appendages: size and interval between symptom onset and the ultrasonographic examination according to echogenicity.

Appendix epididymis Appendix testis Color Doppler ultrasonography Scrotum Torsion Ultrasonography

Journal

Ultrasonography (Seoul, Korea)
ISSN: 2288-5919
Titre abrégé: Ultrasonography
Pays: Korea (South)
ID NLM: 101626019

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Apr 2023
Historique:
received: 04 10 2022
accepted: 05 12 2022
medline: 21 3 2023
pubmed: 21 3 2023
entrez: 20 3 2023
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

This study investigated the size of torsed appendages and the interval between symptom onset and the ultrasonographic examination according to the echogenicity of the torsed appendages. This was a retrospective analysis of 54 cases in 46 patients with torsion of the testicular appendages between December 2008 and July 2021. Eight patients received follow-up ultrasonography 7-48 days after initial ultrasonography. The echogenicity of torsed appendages was classified into three groups: hypoechoic, hyperechoic, or isoechoic. The 54 torsed appendages were hypoechoic (n=40), hyperechoic (n=9), or isoechoic (n=5). The size of the torsed appendages ranged from 4 to 14 mm (8.0±3.1 mm) in hypoechoic torsed appendages and from 2.6 to 5.0 mm (3.7±0.9 mm) in hyperechoic torsed appendages. The interval between symptom onset and the ultrasonographic examination ranged from 0 to 17 days (4.2±4.4 days) in hypoechoic torsed appendages and from 8 to 48 days (29.8±16.0 days) in hyperechoic torsed appendages. The hyperechoic torsed appendages were smaller and had longer intervals between symptom onset and the ultrasonographic examination than the hypoechoic torsed appendages (P<0.05). Three hypoechoic torsed appendages and a single isoechoic torsed appendage on initial ultrasonography became hyperechoic on follow-up ultrasonography. The size of the torsed appendages and the interval between symptom onset and the ultrasonographic examination varied according to the echogenicity of the torsed appendages. The hyperechoic torsed appendages were smaller and had longer intervals until the examination than the hypoechoic torsed appendages.

Identifiants

pubmed: 36935598
pii: usg.22169
doi: 10.14366/usg.22169
pmc: PMC10071070
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

259-264

Références

J Ultrasound Med. 1992 Mar;11(3):81-3
pubmed: 1608079
Eur Radiol. 2003 Jan;13(1):127-35
pubmed: 12541120
J Clin Pathol. 2006 Aug;59(8):831-4
pubmed: 16569689
J Ultrasound Med. 1997 Mar;16(3):189-92; quiz 193-4
pubmed: 9166815
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005 Apr;184(4):1287-92
pubmed: 15788612
J Ultrasound Med. 2005 Jan;24(1):87-91
pubmed: 15615932
J Clin Ultrasound. 2015 Oct;43(8):485-9
pubmed: 25704247
Pediatr Radiol. 1993;23(7):529-32
pubmed: 8309755
J Ultrasound Med. 2011 Oct;30(10):1391-6
pubmed: 21968490

Auteurs

Seung-Hyun Lim (SH)

Department of Radiology, Kyung Hee University Hospital at Gangdong, Seoul, Korea.

Dal Mo Yang (DM)

Department of Radiology, Kyung Hee University Hospital at Gangdong, Seoul, Korea.

Hyun Cheol Kim (HC)

Department of Radiology, Kyung Hee University Hospital at Gangdong, Seoul, Korea.

Sang Won Kim (SW)

Department of Radiology, Kyung Hee University Hospital at Gangdong, Seoul, Korea.

Hyunmin Kim (H)

Department of Radiology, Kyung Hee University Hospital, Seoul, Korea.

Da In Lee (DI)

Department of Radiology, Kyung Hee University Hospital, Seoul, Korea.

Sung Kyung Moon (SK)

Department of Radiology, Kyung Hee University Hospital, Seoul, Korea.

Seung Jin Park (SJ)

Department of Radiology, Kyung Hee University Hospital, Seoul, Korea.

Classifications MeSH