Do repeat ultrasounds affect orchiectomy rate in patients with testicular torsion treated at a pediatric institution?
INTRODUCTION
Testicular torsion is a urological emergency; as the testicular salvage rate decreases with time, prompt intervention is required to restore the blood flow. Interhospital transfers and ultrasound examinations, while clinically essential to proper treatment and diagnosis, may adversely affect outcomes by delaying surgical intervention. Patients transferred to another institution for treatment of testicular torsion may experience a further time delay by undergoing two ultrasound examinations: one at the initial admitting institution and one at the receiving institution. To the knowledge of the authors, no study has yet explored the time delays and outcomes associated with these repeat ultrasounds.


OBJECTIVE
The objective was to investigate the impact of repeat ultrasound imaging on time to treatment and patient outcomes in patients with testicular torsion.


STUDY DESIGN
A retrospective chart review of 133 patients, aged 0-20 years, treated at the authors' institution for testicular torsion was conducted. Neonate patients and patients who did not receive ultrasound were excluded. Demographic and clinical variables were collected from the electronic medical record. Pearson Chi-squared and t-tests were used for univariate comparisons, and multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to measure the relationships between variables.


RESULTS
Forty-nine percent of patients were primary patients, and 51% were transfer patients. Fifty-two percent of transfer patients received repeat ultrasounds. In comparison to salvaged patients, those who underwent orchiectomy experienced a greater delay between presentation at the institution and surgical intervention (229 min vs 177 min, p = 0.048). The transfer status does not appear to be related to the outcome, i.e. orchiectomy versus salvage. Patients who underwent orchiectomy were more likely than salvaged patients to have received repeat ultrasounds (p = 0.008). Repeat ultrasound patients had three times the likelihood of orchiectomy of single ultrasound patients. In a subset analysis of transfer patients, repeat ultrasound patients were more likely than single ultrasound patients to receive an orchiectomy (p = 0.03).


DISCUSSION
In agreement with previous studies, patients who underwent orchiectomy were found to experience greater treatment delays and trend toward transfer. Specifically, repeat ultrasound and time between presentation and intervention appear to influence patient outcomes. The effect of repeat ultrasound on outcomes appears to be independent of the transfer status. The study was limited by its retrospective nature and small sample size.


CONCLUSION
The analysis suggests that efforts to prevent repeat ultrasounds and minimize the time between presentation and intervention would improve patient outcomes. It is proposed that standardized clinical decision-making procedures, such as the TWIST scoring system, be incorporated into hospital protocols.