Research Article| Volume 3, ISSUE 3, P206-208, June 2007

Natural history of testicular regression syndrome and consequences for clinical management

Published:November 08, 2006DOI:



      Testicular regression syndrome (TRS or ‘vanishing testis’) is a condition in which a testis is thought to have once existed but has atrophied and disappeared during early development. The natural history of TRS is in completely understood, due to the absence of any prospectively studied cohort of patients. This study aimed to quantify the cardinal features of the disease and correlate these with age.

      Materials and methods

      A total of 117 cases of TRS were submitted for histopathological examination. Patient age ranged from birth to 12 years, with a median age of 2 years. The proportion of each histological feature present was analysed according to age, using the χ2 test.

      Birth Results

      The 117 cases accounted for 21% of the testicular/paratesticular specimens examined. Only 12 cases (10%) were found to contain testicular tissue, with no readily identifiable germ cells and in particular no atypical germ cells identified. Features such as haemosiderin-laden macrophages, calcification, the presence of a nodule, vas or epididymis were less prevalent amongst specimens from older boys.


      This is the largest series studied to date. With only 10% of the removed specimens containing identifiable testicular tissue with no germ cells seen, a negligible risk of future germ-cell cancer on the affected side is implied. If the laparoscopic findings suggest a diagnosis of vanishing testis, we contend that a groin exploration may be no longer indicated.


      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Journal of Pediatric Urology
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Smith N.M.
        • Byard R.W.
        • Bourne A.J.
        Testicular regression syndrome—a pathological study of 77 cases.
        Histopathology. 1991; 19: 269-272
        • Sutcliffe J.R.
        • Wilson-Storey D.
        • Smith N.M.
        Ante-natal testicular torsion: only one cause of the testicular regression syndrome?.
        J R Coll Surg Edinb. 1996; 41: 99-101
        • Calogero A.E.
        • Garofalo M.R.
        • Barone N.
        • De Palma A.
        • Vicari E.
        • Romeo R.
        • et al.
        Spontaneous regression over time of the germinal epithelium in a Y chromosome-microdeleted patient: case report.
        Hum Reprod. 2001; 16: 1845-1848
        • Imbeaud S.
        • Rey R.
        • Berta P.
        • Chaussain J.L.
        • Wit J.M.
        • Lustig R.H.
        • et al.
        Testicular degeneration in three patients with the persistent mullerian duct syndrome.
        Eur J Pediatr. 1995; 154: 187-190
        • Rattanachaiyanont M.
        • Phophong P.
        • Techatraisak K.
        • Charoenpanich P.
        • Jitpraphai P.
        Embryonic testicular regression syndrome: a case report.
        Med Assoc Thai. 1999; 82: 506-510
        • Law I.
        • Mushtaq M.
        • Wingrove K.
        • Malone M.
        • Sebire N.J.
        Histopathological features of testicular regression syndrome: relation to patient age and implications for management.
        Fetal Pediatr Pathol. 2006; 25: 119-129
        • Asklund C.
        • Jorgensen N.
        • Kold Jensen T.
        • Skakkebaek N.E.
        Biology and epidemiology of testicular dysgenesis.
        BJU Int. 2004; 93: 6-11
        • Grady R.W.
        • Mitchell M.E.
        • Carr M.C.
        Laparoscopic and histological evaluation of the inguinal vanishing testis.
        Urology. 1998; 52: 866-869