Tags

Main Content

Top Content

Directory of Key words from the Journal and the latest article from it.

Nonseminomatous germ celltumorsView Articles

Volume 10, Number 2Case Review

Leydig Cell Hyperplasia Revealed by Gynecomastia

Case Review

Mohamed Jamal El FassiMoulay Hassan FarihMohamed Fadl TaziSoufiane Mellas

Leydig cell tumors are rare and represent 1% to 3% of all tumors of the testis. Leydig cell tumors affect males at any age, but there are 2 peak periods of incidence: between 5 and 10 years and between 25 and 35 years. Their main clinical presentation is a testicular mass associated with endocrinal manifestations that are variable according to age and appearance of the tumor. Our patient, a 17-year-old adolescent, presented with an isolated and painless hypertrophy of the right mammary gland. Clinical examination found gynecomastia and no testicular mass. Hormonal levels and tumor markers were normal. Testicular sonography showed an ovular and homogeneous right intratesticular mass 6 mm in diameter. We treated the patient with an inguinal right orchidectomy. The anatomopathological study found a nodule of Leydig cell hyperplasia. The patient recovered without recurrence at 8-month follow-up. The patient opted for mammoplasty 2 months after his orchidectomy rather than wait for the spontaneous gradual regression of his gynecomastia, which requires at least 1 year. Leydig cell hyperplasia manifests in the adult by signs of hypogonadism, most frequently gynecomastia. Although many teams prefer total orchidectomy because of the diagnostic difficulty associated with malignant forms, simple subcapsular orchidectomy should become the first-line treatment, provided it be subsequently followed by close surveillance, as it preserves maximum fertility, and these tumors usually resolve favorably. [Rev Urol. 2008:10(2):164-167]

FertilityTesticular tumorLeydig cell hyperplasiaNonseminomatous germ celltumorsGynecomastia

nurse practitionersView Articles

Volume 23, Number 2Editorial

Advanced Practice Providers, Urology Workforce Challenges, and Reviews in Urology

Kenneth A. Mitchell

In 2015, the American Urological Association published the Consensus Statement on Advanced Practice Providers (APPs) with the goal of providing up-to-date information on the training of APPs, the scope of practice legislation, and examples of APPs in urologic practices.1 This statement was co-written by an experienced team of physicians and APPs whose purpose was to provide a unique and collaborative perspective on urology APPs. The paper was inspired by a report from an American Urological Association ad hoc committee assembled in 2008, which concluded that there were substantial workforce shortages in urology and that physician assistants and advanced practice registered nurses would provide the “best solution” for the declining urology workforce.2 In 2009, reports estimated that there were 3.1 urologists per 100 000 people in the United States and that urology was the second-oldest surgical subspecialty, with a workforce median age of 52.5 years.2 A published update in 2021, which used data from 2018, revealed that there were 3.89 urologists per 100 000 people in the United States, with 65% of urologists reporting that they were “interested” in the integration and use of APPs; 72.5% of urologists reported already incorporating an APP into their practice, accounting for nearly 41% of a physician (ie, MD or DO) full-time equivalent.2 More recent data showed the use of APPs was lowest in practices with the youngest and oldest subgroups of urologists and was highest in urban urology practices, which represent groups most likely to be affected initially due to the disproportionate geographical urology patient population density.

Physician assistantsnurse practitionershealth workforce