Adolescent testicular microlithiasis: A case-based, multinational survey of clinical management practices.

INTRODUCTION: Testicular microlithiasis (TM) is a condition characterized by calcium deposits within the testis, usually detected incidentally during ultrasonography of the scrotum. TM has been associated with the presence of, and possibly the development of, testicular malignancy. Our aim was to document international clinical management practices for TM and to analyze what factors and perception of risk influence conservative versus active management and follow-up.

METHODS: European Society for Paediatric Urology (ESPU) and Society for Pediatric Urology (SPU) members were invited to complete an online case-based survey of clinical management practices of TM. Eight cases had a single variable changed each time (classic versus limited TM, unilateral versus bilateral, prior cryptorchidism versus no cryptorchidism) to ascertain the provider's perception of risk. The respondents completed multiple choice questions on initial management, follow-up plan, length and interval of follow-up. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to determine factors associated with decisions on management and follow-up.

RESULTS: There were 265 respondents to the survey from 35 countries (Table). Median time in practice was 13 years. Factors that were significantly associated with more aggressive initial management (more than counseling on self-examination) included: not yet in independent practice, low volume TM cases per year, those practicing pediatric and adult urology, classic appearance of TM and cryptorchidism. Factors that were significantly associated with urologist follow-up and active investigation included: European practitioners, low TM case volume per year, those practicing both pediatric urology and pediatric surgery, classic TM appearance and a case history of cryptorchidism. Interval and length of follow-up was wide-ranging, with most respondents favoring annual follow-up.

CONCLUSION: Management of TM varies and a mix of surgeon and case factors significantly influences management strategies. This baseline understanding of the lack of systematic management suggests the need for the development of consensus guidelines and prospective study.