Skip to main content
Medicine logoLink to Medicine
. 2018 Jun 22;97(25):e11164. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000011164

Alveolar paratesticular rhabdomyosarcoma mimicing epididymitis

Case report and literature review

W-H Lei a, Wen-Feng Wu b, Jin-Yang Zhen c, Yang-Hui Li c, Jie Li a,, Jun Xin b,
Editor: NA
PMCID: PMC6024466  PMID: 29924027

Abstract

Rationale:

Most patients with paratesticular rhabdomyosarcoma may typically present as a unilateral, painless palpable scrotum mass. However, only a few cases of RMS presenting as painful edema of the scrotum mimicing epididymitis. We herein report an unusual case of alveolar paratesticular rhabdomyosarcoma misdiagnosed as epididymitis.

Patient concerns:

A 19-year-old adolescent, presented to urologist with painful swelling of the scrotum on the left side over the preceding several days. Antibiotics were administered by physician for two months and the pain improved, but the swelling did not fade.

Diagnoses:

Alveolar praratesticular rhabdomyosarcoma.

Interventions:

A left, soft tissue mass in the scrotum without definite metastasis or lymphadenopathy was confirmed by computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging. A radical left orchiectomy via the inguinal approach was performed successfully.

Outcome:

The patient received 8 cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy, the patient remains recurrence- and metastasis-free at 13 months after surgery.

Lessons:

When paratesticular RMS is presenting with symptoms of epididymitis, this malignant tumor is usually overlooked. When patients complain of painful scrotal swelling, RMS arise from paratesticular tissue should be considered.

Keywords: alveolar paratesticular rhabdomyosarcoma, epididymitis, rhabdomyosarcoma

1. Introduction

Rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS) is the most common pediatric sarcoma, while it is relatively rare in young adults.[1] RMS is responsible for about 6.5% of malignancy in patients aged <15 years.[2] Paratesticular RMS arises from the epididymis, testicular envelopes, spermatic cord, and only represents 7–10% of genitourinary RMS tumors.[3] Paratesticular RMS usually presents as painless and rapidly growing masses in the scrotum or inguinal canal. However, to our knowledge, only a few previous cases had involved symptoms of epididymitis.[4,5] We herein report a rare case of alveolar paratesticular RMS present with painful scrotal swelling symptoms misdiagnosed as epididymitis.

2. Case report

A 19-year-old young man with no significant previous medical history, presented to urologist and complained that he had pain and left scrotal swelling over the preceding several days. Physical examination found an irregular, enlarged, mild tender mass in the cauda epididymis, with warm scrotal skin, and a diameter of 4 × 3 × 1.5 cm3. The bilateral inguinal lymph nodes were unpalpable. No significant findings were detected on the other physical examinations. A scrotal ultrasonography revealed an inhomogeneous echoes swelling of the left epididymis (32 × 21 mm2) with abundant flow of color Doppler signals, suspicious for epididymitis. Therefore, antibiotics were administered by physician for 2 months and the pain improved, but the swelling did not fade.

Then, the patient presented to the Department of Urology of the first hospital of Quanzhou affiliated to Fujian Medical University with scrotal swelling. He was hospitalized for further evaluation. Complete blood cell count showed mild leukocytosis. The tumor markers α- fetoprotein, lactate dehydrogenase, and β-human chorionic gonadotropin were normal. The other laboratory evaluations such as liver function, renal function, and coagulation function were also within the normal range. The second color Doppler reexamination showed the size of left extratesticular masses increased to 40 × 34 mm and was suspected of epididymal malignant tumor. The contrast enhanced computed tomography (CT) scan and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) also revealed an epididymal mass co-exist with hydroceles in the scrotum (Figs. 1 and 2). A left, soft tissue mass in the scrotum without definite metastasis or lymphadenopathy was confirmed by CT and MRI. A radical left orchiectomy via the inguinal approach was performed successfully. During the operation, an irregular, hard tumor could see on the cauda epididymis (Fig. 3). Malignancy of the epididymis was identified by an intraoperative frozen-section biopsy. Histologic examination revealed deep staining small round cells with atypical nuclei and formed alveolar structures (Fig. 4). The testis white film had been invaded, while testicular parenchyma was not infringed and the surgical margin was negative. On immunohistochemical examination, the tumor cells were diffusely and strongly positive for MyoD1 and myogenin (Fig. 5). We conclusively diagnosed alveolar paratesticular RMS (pT2N0M0).[6]

Figure 1.

Figure 1

The contrast enhanced computed tomography scan revealed an epididymal mass co-exist with hydroceles in the scrotum (arrow).

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Magnetic resonance imaging revealed an epididymal mass co-exist with hydroceles in the scrotum.

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Grossly, the tumor is white-gray in color. The specimen is 4 × 4 × 3 cm3 in size.

Figure 4.

Figure 4

Hematoxylin and eosin staining of rhabdomyosarcoma. (A) Deep staining small round cells with atypical nuclei and formed alveolar structures (magnification, ×100). (B) Showed undifferentiated primitive mesenchymal cells and early differentiated rhabdomyocytes (magnification, ×200).

Figure 5.

Figure 5

(A) Immunostaining revealed positive result of MyoD1 in the tumor cells (magnification, ×100). (B) Immunostaining revealed nuclear positivity for myogenin (magnification, ×100).

On the postoperative period, the patient received 8 cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy (VAC regimen: vincristine 1.5 mg/m2, actinomycin 1.5 mg/m2, and cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m2) in the Cancer Hospital of Fudan University. Over a 13-month follow-up period, there was no evidence of recurrence detected by positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET/CT).

3. Discussion

The RMS is a malignant soft-tissue tumor originated from striated muscle cells or mesenchymal cells differentiated from striated muscle cells. It is the most common soft-tissue sarcoma in children. According to the international classification of RMS, the most common histologic types of RMS are botryoid embryonal, embryonal, spindle cell embryonal, anaplastic, and alveolar.[7] The alveolar RMS can arise from the extremities, head and neck, genitourinary tract, retroperitoneum, and orbit.[8] The alveolar histotype occurs less frequently than embryonal RMS and comprises about 20% of all pediatric RMS.[9] However, paratesticular RMS is relatively rare and accounts for about 7% of genitourinary RMS.[9] Our case had an alveolar paratesticular RMS, which is very rare, as only few case of alveolar paratesticular RMS had been published.[10]

The typical clinical manifestation for paratesticular RMS is a painless epididymal mass, or nonspecific symptoms, such as decreased appetite, fatigue, inguinal lymphadenopathy, and weight loss. A paratesticular RMS can cause pain when it oppresses the nerve. However, pain is extremely uncommon and present in only 7% of the cases, whereas a hydrocele may be also a rare presentation.[1113] When paratesticular RMS present with painful unilateral scrotal swelling symptoms, it often leads to a misdiagnosis of epididymitis. As in our case, the patient first presented with painful scrotum and warm scrotal skin symptom. Moreover, antibiotic treatment could relieve the scrotal pain. As a result, the diagnosis of paratesticular RMS was delayed. The gradual enlargement of the unilateral scrotum, which could not relieved by antibiotics, made us to suspect paratesticular malignancy. Therefore, the paratesticular RMS mimicing symptom of epididymitis leads to the delayed diagnosis in our patient.

Scrotal color Doppler ultrasonography is the initial imaging modality for evaluating intrascrotal pathology, but color Doppler appearances of paratesticular RMS could lead to confusion with epididymitis, adenomatoid tumor, and leiomyoma.[14,15] In 1995, Wood and Dewbury[14] first reported the Doppler ultrasound features of paratesticular RMS in a 17-year-old boy. They described a highly reflective soft-tissue epididymal mass, with increased vascularity on color Doppler, which they first considered to be epididymitis. It was not diagnosed as paratesticular RMS until 6 months, after which progressive swelling of the scrotum occurred. In 2004, Mak et al[15] also reported paratesticular RMS in a 14-year-old boy could not distinguish from epididymitis at ultrasound. It illustrated that it may be difficult to differentiate RMS from epididymitis by color Doppler appearances. In the present case, our color Doppler ultrasonography also could not provide enough information for the primary lesion. In our opinion, further evaluation is very important in patients presenting with epididymitis symptom, especially when patients not respond well with antibiotic therapy.

The CT scan, MRI, or PET/CT is regularly used to evaluate distant metastases or make the diagnosis of alveolar RMS.[16,17] Both CT and MRI can be used to assess the site, dimensions, and any distant metastases of the tumor.[18] PET/CT can give accurate information about distant metastases of the malignancy. However, none of them is a confirmatory method. The definitive diagnosis of alveolar RMS requires histopathologic examination. The histologic appearance of alveolar RMS was characterized by aggregates of small, round tumor cells, separated by fibrous septa. Microscopically, alveolar RMS is highly cellular, composed of primitive cells with monomorphous round nuclei and formed alveolar structures. Immunostaining for myogenin and MyoD1 is essential for the differential diagnosis of RMS. Markers such as myoD1 and myoglobin can be used to determine alveolar RMS from other RMS tumors. Our immunostaining revealed positive result of MyoD1 and myogenin in the tumor cells, suggestive of malignant mesenchymal tumor. Electron microscopy and chromosome analysis may be helpful methods for improved pathologic diagnosis of alveolar RMS.[19]

According to the Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study Group (IRSG), surgicopathologic staging of RMS is predictive of outcome,[6] which also could guide the treatment. Some data indicate that staining for myogenin correlate with decreased survival.[20] Literature also reported that anatomic site was also a significant prognostic indicator.[21] Currently, primary paratesticular RMS is generally have a better prognosis and a higher survival rate in comparison with other RMSs.[22] In our case, the patient received 8 cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy, the patient remains recurrence and metastasis free at 13 months after surgery.

Finally, the present case serves to highlight one point worthy of notice: urologist should be aware of the possibility that scrotal pain and swelling could be a rare presentation of alveolar paratesticular RMS. As highly aggressive nature of alveolar paratesticular RMS, further evaluations is important in patients with symptoms of epididymitis, especially who not respond well to antibiotic therapy.

Author contributions

JL, JX, and W-HL contributed to the conception and design of the study. JX, W-FW, J-YZ, and Y-HL conducted the work and collected the data. W-HL drafted the manuscript. All authors approved the final version to be published.

Data curation: Wen-Feng Wu, Jin-Yang Zhen, Yang-Hui Li, Jun Xin.

Funding acquisition: Jun Xin.

Investigation: Jie Li.

Resources: Yang-Hui Li, Jun Xin.

Writing – original draft: W-H Lei.

Writing – review & editing: W-H Lei.

Footnotes

Abbreviations: CT = computed tomography, MRI = magnetic resonance imaging, PET/CT = positron emission tomography-computed tomography, RMS = rhabdomyosarcoma.

W-H Lei and Wen-Feng Wu contributed equally to this work.

This study was financially supported by the public project grant (2016C37138, 2016C33244) from the Science and Technology Department of Zhejiang Province, China, and the public project grant (2016zdxk09) from the Science and Technology bureau of Lishui, Zhejiang Province, China.

Informed patient consent was obtained for publication of this case report.

The committee of human research at Lishui Central Hospital approved the study. The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

References

  • [1].Toro JR, Travis LB, Wu HJ, et al. Incidence patterns of soft tissue sarcomas, regardless of primary site, in the surveillance, epidemiology and end results program, 1978-2001: an analysis of 26,758 cases. Int J Cancer 2006;119:2922–30. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [2].Weiss AR, Lyden ER, Anderson JR, et al. Histologic and clinical characteristics can guide staging evaluations for children and adolescents with rhabdomyosarcoma: a report from the Children's Oncology Group Soft Tissue Sarcoma Committee. J Clin Oncol 2013;31:3226–32. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [3].Stevens MC, Rey A, Bouvet N, et al. Treatment of nonmetastatic rhabdomyosarcoma in childhood and adolescence: third study of the International Society of Paediatric Oncology – SIOP Malignant Mesenchymal Tumor 89. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:2618–28. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [4].Wang HL, Liu LY, Tian RH, et al. Embryonal rhabdomyosarcoma of the epididymis presenting as epididymitis: a case report. Mol Clin Oncol 2016;4:625–7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [5].Kim YJ, Huh JS, Hyun CL, et al. A case of pediatric paratesticular rhabdomyosarcoma with epididymitis. World J Mens Health 2012;30:146–9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [6].Newton WA, Jr, Gehan EA, Webber BL, et al. Classification of rhabdomyosarcomas and related sarcomas. Pathologic aspects and proposal for a new classification – an Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study. Cancer 1995;76:1073–85. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [7].Qualman S, Lynch J, Bridge J, et al. Prevalence and clinical impact of anaplasia in childhood rhabdomyosarcoma: a report from the Soft Tissue Sarcoma Committee of the Children's Oncology Group. Cancer 2008;113:3242–7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [8].El Demellawy D, McGowan-Jordan J, de Nanassy J, et al. Update on molecular findings in rhabdomyosarcoma. Pathology 2017;49:238–46. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [9].Dangle PP, Correa A, Tennyson L, et al. Current management of paratesticular rhabdomyosarcoma. Urol Oncol 2016;34:84–92. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [10].Harel M, Ferrer FA, Shapiro LH, et al. Future directions in risk stratification and therapy for advanced pediatric genitourinary rhabdomyosarcoma. Urol Oncol 2016;34:103–15. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [11].Roman Birmingham PI, Navarro Sebastian FJ, Garcia Gonzalez J, et al. Paratesticular tumors. Description of our case series through a period of 25 years. Arch Esp Urol 2012;65:609–15. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [12].Tang HW, Lin T, Zeng H, et al. Alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma of the tunica vaginalis presenting as a tender hydrocele. Kaohsiung J Med Sci 2013;29:584–5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [13].Zaslau S, Perlmutter AE, Farivar-Mohseni H, et al. Rhabdomyosarcoma of tunica vaginalis masquerading as hydrocele. Urology 2005;65:1001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [14].Wood A, Dewbury KC. Case report: paratesticular rhabdomyosarcoma – colour Doppler appearances. Clin Radiol 1995;50:130–1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [15].Mak CW, Chou CK, Su CC, et al. Ultrasound diagnosis of paratesticular rhabdomyosarcoma. Br J Radiol 2004;77:250–2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [16].Burnette JO, Klaassen Z, Hatley RM, et al. Staging paratesticular rhabdomyosarcoma in the “as low as reasonably achievable” age: the case for PET-CT. Urology 2013;82:220–3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [17].Damazio E, Caran E, Ortiz V, et al. Does negative retroperitoneal CT in adolescents with paratesticular rhabdomyosarcoma preclude the need of retroperitoneal lymph node dissection? Einstein 2011;9:527–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [18].Mason BJ, Kier R. Sonographic and MR imaging appearances of paratesticular rhabdomyosarcoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1998;171:523–4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [19].Nojima T, Abe S, Yamaguchi H, et al. A case of alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma with a chromosomal translocation, t(2;13)(q37;q14). Virchows Archiv A Pathol Anat Histopathol 1990;417:357–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [20].Sebire NJ, Malone M. Myogenin and MyoD1 expression in paediatric rhabdomyosarcomas. J Clin Pathol 2003;56:412–6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [21].Thompson LDR, Jo VY, Agaimy A, et al. Sinonasal tract alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma in adults: a clinicopathologic and immunophenotypic study of fifty-two cases with emphasis on epithelial immunoreactivity. Head Neck Pathol 2018;12:181–92. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [22].Hammond WJ, Farber BA, Price AP, et al. Paratesticular rhabdomyosarcoma: importance of initial therapy. J Pediatr Surg 2017;52:304–8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Medicine are provided here courtesy of Wolters Kluwer Health

RESOURCES