A Comparison Between the Efficacy and Safety of Microscopic Inguinal and Subinguinal Varicocelectomy

Overview

Journal Turk J Urol

Publisher Aves

Date 2019 Jul 11

PMID 31291187

Citations 4

Authors

Saban Oguz Demirdogen

Fatih Ozkaya

Ahmet Emre Cinislioglu

Mehmet Sefa Altay

Senol Adanur

Ozkan Polat

Isa Ozbey

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objective: To compare microscopic inguinal (MIV) and subinguinal varicocelectomy (MSV) surgeries with respect to efficacy and safety.

Material And Methods: Patients who underwent varicocelectomy between January 2002 and January 2018 were evaluated retrospectively and prospectively. The patients who underwent varicocelectomy until December 2015 were analyzed retrospectively and the cases after January 2016 were analyzed prospectively. In our study, the married infertile male cases were compared on the basis of operation duration, number of ligated veins, number of preserved veins, postoperative pain score (visual analogue scale: VAS), patient satisfaction, surgeon satisfaction, changes in sperm parameters, testicular consistency, pregnancy rates, and complications, such as hydrocele, testicular atrophy, and recurrence of varicocele. Surgical success rates were compared by semen analysis between unmarried infertile male cases because pregnancy rates cannot be tested. The patients were recalled for control examinations every 3 months for 1 year and tested the above-mentioned parameters. Statistical Package for the Social Sciences Version 20 Windows Software was used for data analysis and comparison between the two groups.

Results: The study included a total of 136 adult patients. Mean age of the patients was 28.14 (20-41) years. MSV and MIV were performed in 62 (45.6%) and 74 (54.4%) patients, respectively. No statistically significant difference was detected between the two groups in terms of admission duration, semen parameters within the 1-year follow-up process, hormonal changes, and complication rates. Operation duration was significantly longer in the MSV group. It was determined that a fewer number of veins were ligated, and a fewer number of veins needed to be ligated in the MIV group. The analysis of all the patients revealed that pain scores at 4 and 24 hours postoperatively were significantly statistically lower in the MSV group.

Conclusion: MIV and MSV are distinct, efficient, and safe surgical techniques with specific advantages and disadvantages. Their efficacy and safety rates are similar.

Citing Articles

Preserving one artery shortens the surgical time and does not affect the efficacy of microsurgical subinguinal varicocelectomy: preliminary findings from a retrospective study.

Cao X, Tian C, Feng W, Zhu S, Chen K, Zheng Y BMC Urol. 2024; 24(1):277.

PMID: 39709391 PMC: 11662722. DOI: 10.1186/s12894-024-01670-x.

The Influence of Number of Ligated Veins in Varicocele Patients Undergoing Microsurgical Varicocelectomy in Postoperative Pain and Sperm Parameters Outcome.

Syarief A, Rahman I, Setiawan M, Rizaldi F Med Arch. 2023; 77(4):299-305.

PMID: 37876570 PMC: 10591252. DOI: 10.5455/medarh.2023.77.299-305.

Efficacy of transversalis fascia plane block as a novel ındication for varicocelectomy surgery: prospective randomized controlled study.

Celik E, Ozbey I, Aydin M, Yayik A, Ahiskalioglu E, Tor I BMC Anesthesiol. 2023; 23(1):48.

PMID: 36750790 PMC: 9903451. DOI: 10.1186/s12871-023-02009-z.

Factors Associated with Varicocele Recurrence After Microscopic Sub-Inguinal Varicocelectomy.

Alkhamees M, Hamri S, Alhumaid T, Alissa L, Al-Lishlish H, Abudalo R Res Rep Urol. 2020; 12:651-657.

PMID: 33365283 PMC: 7751726. DOI: 10.2147/RRU.S281739.

References

Cayan S, Kadioglu T, Tefekli A, Kadioglu A, Tellaloglu S . Comparison of results and complications of high ligation surgery and microsurgical high inguinal varicocelectomy in the treatment of varicocele. Urology. 2000; 55(5):750-4. DOI: 10.1016/s0090-4295(99)00603-2. View

Cayan S, Erdemir F, Ozbey I, Turek P, Kadioglu A, Tellaloglu S . Can varicocelectomy significantly change the way couples use assisted reproductive technologies?. J Urol. 2002; 167(4):1749-52. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-5347(05)65192-0. View

IVANISSEVICH O . Left varicocele due to reflux; experience with 4,470 operative cases in forty-two years. J Int Coll Surg. 1960; 34:742-55. View

Beck E, Schlegel P, Goldstein M . Intraoperative varicocele anatomy: a macroscopic and microscopic study. J Urol. 1992; 148(4):1190-4. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)36857-x. View

Hopps C, Lemer M, Schlegel P, Goldstein M . Intraoperative varicocele anatomy: a microscopic study of the inguinal versus subinguinal approach. J Urol. 2003; 170(6 Pt 1):2366-70. DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000097400.67715.f8. View

Nabi G, Asterlings S, Greene D, Marsh R . Percutaneous embolization of varicoceles: outcomes and correlation of semen improvement with pregnancy. Urology. 2004; 63(2):359-63. DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2003.09.026. View

Gontero P, Pretti G, Fontana F, Zitella A, Marchioro G, Frea B . Inguinal versus subinguinal varicocele vein ligation using magnifying loupe under local anesthesia: which technique is preferable in clinical practice?. Urology. 2005; 66(5):1075-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2005.05.009. View

Watanabe M, Nagai A, Kusumi N, Tsuboi H, Nasu Y, Kumon H . Minimal invasiveness and effectivity of subinguinal microscopic varicocelectomy: a comparative study with retroperitoneal high and laparoscopic approaches. Int J Urol. 2005; 12(10):892-8. DOI: 10.1111/j.1442-2042.2005.01142.x. View

Palomo A . Radical cure of varicocele by a new technique; preliminary report. J Urol. 1949; 61(3):604-7. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5347(17)69113-4. View

10.

Glassberg K, Poon S, Gjertson C, DeCastro G, Misseri R . Laparoscopic lymphatic sparing varicocelectomy in adolescents. J Urol. 2008; 180(1):326-30. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2008.03.064. View

11.

Cayan S, Shavakhabov S, Kadioglu A . Treatment of palpable varicocele in infertile men: a meta-analysis to define the best technique. J Androl. 2008; 30(1):33-40. DOI: 10.2164/jandrol.108.005967. View

12.

Soylemez H, Penbegul N, Atar M, Bozkurt Y, Sancaktutar A, Altunoluk B . Comparison of laparoscopic and microscopic subinguinal varicocelectomy in terms of postoperative scrotal pain. JSLS. 2013; 16(2):212-7. PMC: 3481232. DOI: 10.4293/108680812x13427982376220. View

13.

Lv K, Zhuang J, Zhao L, Wan Z, Zhang Y, Gao Y . Varicocele anatomy during subinguinal microsurgical varicocelectomy in Chinese men. Andrologia. 2015; 47(10):1190-5. DOI: 10.1111/and.12402. View

14.

Lv J, Wang L, Wei X, Zhang Z, Zheng T, Huang Y . Comparison of Treatment Outcomes of Different Spermatic Vein Ligation Procedures in Varicocele Treatment. Am J Ther. 2015; 23(6):e1329-e1334. DOI: 10.1097/MJT.0000000000000232. View

15.

Pettersson S, SODERHOLM B, Persson J, Eriksson S, FRITJOFSSON A . Testicular blood flow in man measured with venous occlusion plethysmography and xenon133. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 1973; 7(2):115-9. DOI: 10.3109/00365597309133685. View

16.

Coolsaet B . The varicocele syndrome: venography determining the optimal level for surgical management. J Urol. 1980; 124(6):833-9. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)55688-8. View