We present the clinical case of a 33-year-old man who consulted for progressive enlargement of the right testicle over three months. He reported no pain or urinary symptoms. He had no allergies or pathologies of interest. He reported normal psychomotor development with no history of cryptorchidism or hydrocele during childhood. He denies alcohol, tobacco or other drug use. Physical examination revealed a diffuse increase in the size and consistency of the right testicle with negative transluminescence. The left testicle is normal. There were no palpable inguinal lymphadenopathies or in the rest of his anatomy. There was no gynaecomastia, visceromegaly or peritoneal irritation. We decided to perform a testicular ultrasound in primary care, and found a diffuse alteration of the ultrastructure without the presence of cysts or calcifications. We requested a complete blood analysis with tumour markers, a chest X-ray and a preferential referral to the urology department. Both haemogram and basic biochemistry were strictly normal, as were AFP, Beta-HCG and LDH. The chest X-ray was also normal. Given the long waiting time for the urology consultation, we decided to refer the patient to the hospital emergency department with the complete work-up performed in primary care. A regular testicular ultrasound was performed which confirmed: "Right testicle increased in size with diffuse alteration of echogenicity, without calcifications, with diffuse increase in vascularisation. Inflammatory process of the right orchitis type, however, given the time of evolution, a neoplastic process cannot be ruled out". He was admitted to Urology and a radical right inguinal orchiectomy was performed. Pathological anatomy reports: "Classic seminoma with a diameter greater than 8 cm, without evidence of infiltration of the tunica albuginea. Remains of testicular parenchyma with foci of intratubular germinal tumour. Epididymis and resection edge of the spermatic cord with no evidence of malignancy. In view of these findings, an abdominopelvic computerised tomography (CT) scan was performed for staging: "No mediastinal, hilar or axillary lymphadenopathy of significant size was observed. Right paracardiac adenopathy of 6 mm and micronodule of 4 mm in LM. No pathological retroperitoneal or pelvic lymphadenopathy was observed. There were findings compatible with mesenteric panniculitis and bilateral inguinal lymphadenopathy with a reactive appearance secondary to surgery. The rest of the study showed no other findings. He was referred to Oncology with the diagnosis of pure stage I seminoma. Given that more than 80% of cases never relapse, in correlation with the European Association of Urology Guidelines, it was decided to perform surveillance without the need for adjuvant treatment. However, the small but clinically significant risk of recurrence supports the need for long-term surveillance2 and initiation of salvage radiotherapy or cisplatin-based chemotherapy. As recurrences occur mainly in the first 2 years, follow-up CT scanning is recommended every 3 months in the first year, every 4 months in the second year and every 6 and 12 months in the following years3. Our patient has been followed up for more than 3 years, with no data of relapse. The non-specific findings present in the first CT scan have disappeared and tumour markers remain negative to date.