ReviewBMJ case reports2020
Transverse testicular ectopia: two rare adult cases and a review of literature.
Review in BMJ case reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Incidental discovery of persistent Müllerian duct syndrome with transverse testicular ectopia during adult inguinal hernia repair: A case report.Urology case reports · 2026Article
- A rare case of left transverse testicular ectopia in an adult.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2024Article
- Testicular ectopia: A case report.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The first case is a 45-year-old man who presented with complaints of right-sided indirect hernia. On examination the left hemiscrotum was empty. Open hernioplasty and mesh fixation with orchiopexy of both testes were done in the same hemiscrotum, followed by MRI for further evaluation. The second case is a 26-year-old man who presented with penoscrotal hypospadias and empty left hemiscrotum, with the left testis not palpable in the scrotum or the inguinal region. MRI, karyotyping and laparoscopic orchidectomy were performed, followed by endocrinology work-up. From our experience, preoperative diagnosis with ultrasonography and/or MRI prior to diagnostic laproscopy is benifical when there is a strong suspicion of mullerian duct remnants. In other cases, diagnostic laparoscopy can be useful in diagnosis and management. Placement of both testes in the same hemiscrotum can be considered safe, although not ideal. Also, in cases with partial gonadal dysgenesis, laparoscopic orchidectomy along with excision of the mullerian remnantsis a better approach than orchiopexy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.