Click Here to Zoom

Figure 1: Transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) shows no left seminal vesicle and right hypoplastic seminal vesicle with ovoid cystic shape (2.0x0.8cm).

Click Here to Zoom

Figure 2 (A,B): CT and MRI demonstrates absence of left seminal vesicle and right hypoplastic seminal vesicle with similar signal intensity of muscle or bladder.

Anomalies of the seminal vesicles can be categorized in to abnormalities of number (agenesis, fusion), canalization (cysts) and maturation (hypoplasia)⁶. Seminal vesicle lesions are uncommon, but it may be detected more commonly with increased use of TRUS, CT or MRI, and it should be considered when evaluating males with pelvic masses. There are many causes of pelvic masses in males. Small cysts may occur in the prostate, ejaculatory duct, or cowper gland. Mullerian duct or utricle cysts are not uncommon, but are midline. Tumors may arise in bladder, prostate, urethra, or other pelvic structures including, rarely, the seminal vesicle. Abscesses may occur in a variety of locations^4,7,8.

Early imaging of the seminal vesicles was accomplished by seminal vesiculography. Although it is still regarded as the gold standart for visualizing the male reproductive tract, it is invasive and carries with a risk of damage to the vas deferens. Therefore, seminal vesiculography is generally used prior to definitive surgery for obstruction. Recently, TRUS has replaced seminal vesiculography as diagnostic technique of choice in the evaluation of male pelvic reproductive anatomy. TRUS is indicated in infertile patients with low volume azoospermia and low volume oligoasthenospermia as well in men with painful ejaculation or recurrent hematospermia. CT can very accurately show the intennal pelvic organs; thus absence of seminal vesicles or mass arising in them is easily detectable by CT^4,7,8. MRI has contributed to more precise imaging of the seminal vesicles. In MRI imaging, normal seminal vesicle signal intensity is similar to that of muscle or bladder on T1 weighted images. On T2 weighted MRI images, the seminal vesicles display high signal intensity that is greater than that of the surrounding fat. CT and MRI should be reserved for more complex situations and pre-surgical intervention^4,8. The application of TRUS has assumed a significant role in the imaging of seminal vesicles. TRUS is more readily available and economical according to CT and MRI^4,9. In the present case, TRUS was performed to the patient for initial evaluation, and it showed absence of left seminal vesicle and hypoplastic right seminal vesicle with ovoid cystic shape. CT and MRI were also demonstrated no left seminal vesicle and hypoplastic right seminal vesicle. Similarly the other reports, T1 weighted image of MRI showed the hypoplastic right seminal vesicle the same signal intensity as muscle or bladder.

Agenesis of seminal vesicle is unreconstractable and reguires no surgical or medical treatment. Microsurgical epididymal aspiration or testicular sperm extraction combined ICSI have provided a viable treatment strategy for the management of such cases¹⁰. Similarly, Microsurgical epididymal aspiration or testicular sperm extraction combined ICSI was recommended to the patient.

In conclusion, absence of unilateral seminal vesicle associated with contralateral hypoplasia of seminal vesicle is a rare situation. The diagnostic work-up consists of TRUS, CT and MRI. TRUS may be good method for initial evaluation of these such anomalies. However, CT and MRI should be reserved for selected patients when the result of TRUS is not conclusive. In such cases, assisted reproductive techniques should be recommended to the patient for children.

1) Nino-Murcia M, Friedland GW, deVries PA. Congenital anomalies of the male genitalia. In: Pollack HM(Editor). Clinical Urology. vol 1, Philadelphia: Saunders, 2002: 868-891.

2) Sandlow JI, Williams RD. Surgery of the seminal vesicles. In: Walsh PC, Retik AB, Vaughan ED, Wein AJ (Editors). Champbell’s Urology. vol 4, Philadelphia: Saunders, 2002: 3869- 3885.

3) Wu HF, Qiao D, Qian LX, et al. Congenital agenesis of seminal vesicle. Asian J Androl 2005; 7:449-452.

4) King FB, Hattery RR, Lieber MM, Williamson B, Hartman GW, Berquist TH. Seminal vesicle imaging. RadioGraphics 1989; 9:653-676.

5) Gonzales GF. Function of seminal vesicles and their role on male fertility. Asian J Androl 2001; 3: 251-58.

6) Vohra S, Morgentaler A. Congenital anomalies of the vas deferens, epididymis, and seminal vesicles. Urology 1997; 49:313-

7) Kenney PJ, Leeson MD. Congenital anomalies of the seminal vesicles: spectrum of computed tomographic findings. Radiology 1983; 149:247-251.

8) Arora SS, Breiman RS, Webb EM, Westphalen AC, Yeh BM, Coakley FV. CT and MRI of congenital anomalies of the seminal vesicles. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007; 189:130-35.

9) Dominguez C, Boranat F, Cunat E, Broseta E, Martinez R, Jimenez-cruz JF. Agenesis of seminal vesicles in infertile males: ultrasonic diagnosis. Eur Urol 1991; 20:129-132.

10) Qui Y, Yang DT, Wang SM, Sun HQ, Jia YF. Successful pregnancy and birth after intrauterine insemination caput epididymal sperm by percutaneous aspiration. Asian J Androl 2003; 5:73-75.