Article Sidebar
Published:
Dec 16, 2012Keywords:
Laparoscopic varicocelectomy Varicocele Inguinal varicocelectomy
Article Details
Issue
Section
Articles
Copyright for articles published in this journal is retained by the journal.
Main Article Content
Five mm laparoscopic varicocelectomy versus conventional varicocele ligation in young men with symptomatic varicocele: A randomized clinical study
Abstract
Objectives: To compare the therapeutic success, morbidity and the costs of 5mm laparoscopic varicocele ligation (LV) compared to inguinal varicocelectomy (IV).
Patients and methods: Eighty patients with idiopathic symptomatic varicocele of grades I–III diagnosed by clinical examination and Doppler ultrasonography were randomly assigned to LV or IV (40 patients in each group). The mean patient age was 25.2±1.4 (range 18–40) years. Of the 80 patients treated 21.3% had a left-sided varicocele, 70% had bilateral varicoceles and 8.8% a right-sided varicocele. Of 136 varicoceles, 37 (27.2%) were grade III, 51 (37.5%) grade II and 48 (35.3%) were grade I. The indications for varicocele ligation were: abnormal spermiogram in 47 patients (58.7%), scrotal pain in 19 (23.8%) and cosmetic impairment in 14 (17.5%). A total of 136 varicocele ligations were performed (67 IV and 69 LV). All patients were followed up for 4–8 months to assess early complications, testicular size, late complications and persistence or recurrence of the varicocele.
Results: LV was associated with shorter operative time, shorter hospital stay and lower cost compared to IV. The overall incidence of postoperative complications including hydrocele, epididymitis and local pain was significantly higher among patients undergoing IV compared with LV (17.5% vs 5%). The incidence of persistent varicoceles was not significantly different between the 2 groups, but the varicocele recurrence rate was significantly lower in the LV compared to the IV group (5% vs. 17.5%, p≤0.02).
Conclusions: LV is a less invasive treatment than IV for managing male varicoceles. It is also associated with lower costs and better outcomes and should therefore be the preferred method of treatment for male varicoceles.
Patients and methods: Eighty patients with idiopathic symptomatic varicocele of grades I–III diagnosed by clinical examination and Doppler ultrasonography were randomly assigned to LV or IV (40 patients in each group). The mean patient age was 25.2±1.4 (range 18–40) years. Of the 80 patients treated 21.3% had a left-sided varicocele, 70% had bilateral varicoceles and 8.8% a right-sided varicocele. Of 136 varicoceles, 37 (27.2%) were grade III, 51 (37.5%) grade II and 48 (35.3%) were grade I. The indications for varicocele ligation were: abnormal spermiogram in 47 patients (58.7%), scrotal pain in 19 (23.8%) and cosmetic impairment in 14 (17.5%). A total of 136 varicocele ligations were performed (67 IV and 69 LV). All patients were followed up for 4–8 months to assess early complications, testicular size, late complications and persistence or recurrence of the varicocele.
Results: LV was associated with shorter operative time, shorter hospital stay and lower cost compared to IV. The overall incidence of postoperative complications including hydrocele, epididymitis and local pain was significantly higher among patients undergoing IV compared with LV (17.5% vs 5%). The incidence of persistent varicoceles was not significantly different between the 2 groups, but the varicocele recurrence rate was significantly lower in the LV compared to the IV group (5% vs. 17.5%, p≤0.02).
Conclusions: LV is a less invasive treatment than IV for managing male varicoceles. It is also associated with lower costs and better outcomes and should therefore be the preferred method of treatment for male varicoceles.
