Skip to main content
Log in

Cryptorchidism: A general surgical perspective

  • Original Papers
  • Published:
Irish Journal of Medical Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background The treatment of cryptorchidism has changed, with surgery now advocated before the age of two years. Delayed treatment affects fertility, malignant potential and psychological stress.

Aims To assess the pattern of referral of cryptorchid patients to a surgical clinic, management and follow-up.

Methods A four-year review of 114 cryptorchid patients examined age at presentation, waiting time, timing of surgery and length of follow-up.

Results The mean age at presentation to the surgical clinic was 6.7 years (neonatal to 71). The mean age at orchidopexy was 5.6 years. Seventy per cent had a surgical procedure within eight weeks of presentation to a surgeon. Seven per cent were kept under surveillance until a maximum age of three years before orchidopexy was considered. Only 29% proceeded to surgery before the age of two. Seventeen were referred to a paediatric urology unit for further management.

Conclusions Orchidopexy seems prudent between one and two years of age. Only one-quarter of patients underwent early orchidopexy. It is vital that it is detected early, by paediatricians at birth or the general practitioners (GPs) at the six-week check up. Prompt referral to a surgeon with a paediatric interest is essential in order to permit surveillance or surgery.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Gill B, Kogan SJ. Cryptorchidism: current concepts.Pediatr Clin North Am 1997; 44(5): 1211–27.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Dawson C, Whitfield H. ABC of urology. Common paediatric problems.BMJ 1996; 312(7041): 1291–4.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Hadzieselimovic F, Herzog B, Buser M. Development of cryptorchid testes.Ear J Pediatr 1987; 146 (suppl 2): 8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Puri P, O’Donnell B. Semen analysis of patients who had orchidopexy at or after seven years of age.Lancet 1988; 2: 1051.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Garcia J, Gonzalez N, Gomez ME et al.Br J Urol 1995; 75 (6): 697–701.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Pike MC, Chilvers C, Peckham MJ. Effect of age at orchidopexy on risk of testicular cancer.Lancet 1986; 1 (8492): 1246–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Depue RH, Pike, Henderson BE. Cryptorchidism and testicular cancer.J Natl Cancer Inst 1986; 77 (3): 830–3.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Kogan SJ. Fertility in cryptorchidism: an overview in 1987.Eur J Paediatr 1987; 146: 21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Cilento BG, Najjar SS, Atala A. Cryptorchidism and testicular torsion.Pediatr Clin North Am 1993; 40 (6): 1133–49.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Pottern LM, Brown M, Hoover RN et al. Testicular cancer risk among young men: role of cryptorchidism and inguinal hernia.J Natl Cancer Inst 1985; 74: 37.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Woodhouse CRJ. Late malignancy risk in urology.Br J Urol. 1992; 70: 345–51.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Davenport M. ABC of general paediatric surgery. Inguinal hernia, hydrocoele, and undescended testis.BMJ 1996; 312 (7030): 564–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to KT Lim.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lim, K., Casey, R., Lennon, F. et al. Cryptorchidism: A general surgical perspective. Ir J Med Sci 172, 139–140 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02914500

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02914500

Keywords

Navigation