Juvenile granulosa cell tumor of the testis: prenatal diagnosis and prescrotal approach
© Bulotta et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2012
Received: 6 September 2012
Accepted: 1 December 2012
Published: 6 December 2012
Neonatal testicular tumors are rare and should be considered in the differential diagnosis of newborn scrotal masses. Juvenile granulosa cell tumor (JGCT) accounts for about 5% of all prepubertal testis tumors. As a benign neoplasm, radical orchiectomy is sufficient for treatment. We report a case of a newborn with a prenatal diagnosis of scrotal mass. After surgery, the histological diagnosis was juvenile granulosa cell tumor. To date the patient is healthy.
KeywordsGonadal sex cord stromal tumor Orchiectomy Alpha fetoprotein Ultrasound Human chorionic gonadotropin
Prepubertal testicular tumors are rare and they account for 1% of all pediatric solid tumors. Granulosa cell tumor is a benign neoplasm, and it can be distinguished by adult or juvenile type, with the juvenile type accounting for 1% to 5% of all prepubertal testis tumors. Although rare, it is the most common stromal cord neoplasm of the testis in infancy. JGCT typically presents a painless scrotal mass. Ultrasound evaluation typically shows a circumscribed tumor with multicystic appearance. Only one case of prenatal diagnosis has been reported. Although inguinal orchiectomy has been the standard surgical therapy, a testicular sparing surgery has been recently proposed but it is still not general practice among pediatric surgeons. We reported a case of JGCT with prenatal diagnosis treated by an orchiectomy performed with a prescrotal approach.
The granulosa cell tumor (GCT) is a distinctive form of gonadal sex cord stromal tumor and accounts for 1-5% of all prepubertal testis tumors. It is a benign neoplasm, hormonally inactive and its prognosis is very good.
Although usually diagnosed in the first year of life with a typical clinical presentation characterized by a painless testicular mass that may involve an undescended or scrotal testis, some authors reported a prenatal diagnose of testicular mass. Peterson and Skoog reported a case of a cystic structure seen with an ultrasound evaluation at 35 week’s gestation. In our case fetal ultrasound at 36th week of gestation showed a multicystic alteration of the left testicle. As confirmed by our case, prenatal diagnosis is difficult but possible. Evidence of a general testicular alteration in the unborn baby enabled early diagnosis at birth by clinical examination. Sometimes the tumor presents concomitantly with neonatal torsion[2, 4].
Our patient was a neonate and the testis involved was in situ, without torsion. As the tumor may be associated with anomalous karyotype or ambiguous genitalia[5, 6] we performed a genetic test, which revealed a normal karyotype, and the clinical features of the genitalia were normal.
Postnatal management consisted of abdominal and testicular ultrasound, karyotyping, blood chemistry and hormonal evaluation. Abdominal ultrasound was negative, whereas testicular scans showed a left testicle of increased size and echotexture.
In our practice we use to determine serum AFP and B-HCG in all infants with a testicular tumors. In our case serum levels of AFP and B-HCG were elevated at preoperative evaluation, according to the reference range for normal AFP established by WU et al., as many Authors recognize the normal serum AFP range for neonates varies according to gestational age and body weight and it is physiologically elevated in neonatal age. Serum AFP in the normal range for age reliably excludes a yolk sac tumor and for this reasons some authors reported that this fact indicates that a testis sparing procedure is feasible. As stated by Grady et al., normal AFP level should not be expected in infants with benign teratoma.
In our case we decided to perform a total orchiectomy because of the presence of elevated values of serum AFP. We performed a subinguinal approach with the possibility to realize a safe orchiectomy with an high clamping of spermatic vessels. This approach is less invasive as an inguinal approach and it allows to perform a safe orchiectomy. This incision enables a good visualization of the testicle and spermatic cord, allowing complete excision of the intact mass and thorough assessment of the margins for partial resection if possible.
Chemotherapy and radiotherapy are not contemplated for this tumor because it is non invasive and metastases have never been described.
Follow-up is a controversial topic; some authors suggest that it should be performed for at least 5 years after surgery, as for most other tumors. Others argue that because orchiectomy is the only treatment, no further management is required after surgical removal of the testicle. However, we decided to evaluate the patient one and three months after the surgery, with blood tests and testicular ultrasound. We suggested annual ultrasonography and clinical evaluation for at least 5 years after surgery.
We agree with other reports that although neonatal testicular tumors are rare, they should be considered in the differential diagnosis of scrotal masses in newborns. Testicular masses should be considered pathological until proven otherwise and a prenatal diagnosis of a scrotal mass is possible. We therefore recommend thorough inspection of the genitalia at birth, followed if necessary by hormonal assessment and testicular ultrasound. In patients affected by a testicular neoplastic disease, we argue that the only possible approach is inguinal. A subinguinal approach enables the testicle and spermatic cord to be exposed, allowing complete excision of the intact mass and thorough assessment of the margins for partial resection if possible. Follow-up of the present case is still too short to exclude recurrence, although no cases of recurrence have been reported in literature. In conclusion, the main aim of our follow-up of this patient will be to avoid damage to the surviving testicle, protect fertility and monitor for eventual recurrence.
Written informed consent was obtained from the patients parents for publication of this report and any accompanying images.
- Zugor V, Labanaris AP, Witt J, Seidler A, Weingartner K, Schott E: ongenital Juvenile Granulosa Cell of the Testis in newborn. Anticancer. 2010, 30: 1731-1734.Google Scholar
- Partalis N, Tzardi M, Barbagadakis S, Sakellaris G: Juvenile Granulosa Cell Tumor Arising From Intra-abdominal Testis in Newborn: Case Report and Review of the Literature. Urology. 2011, 2011: 2011-Article in pressGoogle Scholar
- Peterson C, Skoog S: Prenatal diagnosis of juvenile granulosa cell tumor of the testis. J Pediatr Urol. 2008, 4: 472-474. 10.1016/j.jpurol.2008.04.005.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Canning DA: Congenital juvenile granulosa cell tumor of the testis in newborns. J Urol. 2011, 185: 684-10.1016/S0022-5347(11)60127-4.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Shukla AR, Huff DS, Canning DA, Filmer RB, Snyder HM, Carpintieri D, Carr MC: Juvenile granulosa cell tumor of the testis: contemporary clinical management and pathological diagnosis. J Urol. 2004, 171: 1900-1902. 10.1097/01.ju.0000120223.29924.3b.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Chan YF, Restall P, Kimble R: Juvenile granulosa cell tumor of the testis: report of two cases in newborns. J Pediatr Surg. 1997, 32: 752-753. 10.1016/S0022-3468(97)90025-7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Wu JT, Book L, Sudar K: Serum alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) levels in normal infants. Pediatr Res. 1981, 15: 50-10.1203/00006450-198101000-00012.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Young RH, Lawrence WD, Scully RE: Juvenile granulosa cell tumor - another neoplasm associated with abnormal chromosomes and ambiguous genitalia. A report of three cases. Am J Surg Pathol. 1985, 9: 737-743. 10.1097/00000478-198510000-00005.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Valla JS: for the group d’etude en urologie pédiatrique. Testis-sparing surgery for benign testicular tumors in children. J Urol. 2001, 165: 2280-2283. 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)66184-8.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Grady RN, Ross JS, Kay R: Epidermiological features of testicular teratoma in a prepubertal population. J Urol. 1997, 158: 1197-View ArticleGoogle Scholar
This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.