ReviewJapanese journal of radiology2024
Extratesticular masses focusing on MRI findings.
Review in Japanese journal of radiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- MRI of spermatic cord lesions: a practical pattern-based approach.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Review
- Scrotal leiomyoma: A rare benign scrotal wall lesion - A case report.Urology case reports · 2026Article
- Beyond triorchidism: diagnostic pitfalls and an evidence-driven algorithm for pediatric supernumerary testes.European journal of medical research · 2026Article
- MRI of the Scrotum and Penis: Current Applications and Clinical Relevance.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Scrotal masses, whether cystic or solid lesions, are routinely evaluated using ultrasonography. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) may be used for further investigation in cases with atypical findings, difficult diagnoses, large masses, and/or unclear relationships with the surrounding tissues. Scrotal solid masses are divided into intra- and extra-testicular masses. A staggering 90% of the intratesticular masses are malignant, whereas 75% of extratesticular masses are benign. Extratesticular masses are less common than intratesticular masses; however, some extratesticular masses present characteristic MRI findings. Familiarity with these specific MRI features of extratesticular masses is beneficial to radiologists, as appropriate diagnoses can help avoid unnecessary invasive treatments such as orchiectomy. In this review, we describe fibrous pseudotumors, polyorchidism, adenomatoid tumors, and scrotal leiomyoma as benign paratesticular masses, focusing on their characteristic imaging features on MRI. Although these tumors are extremely rare, their MRI findings are distinctive, and accurate diagnoses can prevent unnecessary orchiectomy. In addition, to demonstrate the pitfalls of diagnosing extratesticular masses, we present a case of seminoma misidentified as extratesticular masses due to large extensions outside the testis. Spermatic cord sarcoma, including rhabdomyosarcoma, leiomyosarcoma, and liposarcoma, and metastasis to the spermatic cord are described as malignant extratesticular masses. This review focused on extratesticular masses and elaborates the imaging findings that can aid in the accurate diagnosis using MRI.
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.