Retrospective review identifies prostate cancer as the main reason for orchidectomy, indicating effective outcomes.
Background: Orchidectomy is the surgical removal of one or both testes. It is one of the commonly done procedures in urologic practice for various clinical indications. Objectives: We aimed to review the indications, methods, and outcomes of orchidectomy procedures done for various indications in a health care facility in South East Nigeria. Materials and Methods: This was a retrospective study of patients who underwent orchidectomy in our tertiary healthcare facility over a 10-year period (2012–2021). The case files of all patients who had orchidectomy within the review period were retrieved, and data were entered into a proforma for the study. Data analysis was done using Statistical Package for Social Science version 20.0. Results: Eighty patients with complete records were analysed. Their mean age was 64.5 ± 17.1 years. The commonest indication for orchidectomy was advanced cancer of prostate (CAP) in 67.0 (83.8%) with the commonest (65.0%) approach used being trans-scrotal. The majority of procedures (56.3%) were done using regional anaesthesia. Out of 147 orchidectomies done, 67 patients (83.8%), seven patients (8.8%), and 6 (7.5%) were offered bilateral, right-sided and left-sided orchidectomy, respectively. Among 67 patients with advanced CAP that had bilateral orchidectomies, 44 patients (65.7%), 19 patients (28.4%), and four patients (6.0%) had bilateral total orchidectomy, bilateral subcapsular orchidectomy, and bilateral sub-epididymal orchidectomy, respectively. Twenty-three patients (28.7%) had procedure-related complications with surgical site infection being the commonest seen in eight patients (10.0%). Conclusion: Orchidectomy is a common procedure for various indications in urologic practice. It is a safe procedure with a good outcome and minimal morbidity.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ulebe et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: