Literature DB >> 16904464

Results of microsurgical subinguinal varicocelectomy in children and adolescents.

Onder Yaman1, Tarkan Soygur, Ali E Zumrutbas, Berkan Resorlu.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To report our experience with microsurgical subinguinal varicocelectomy in boys younger than 18 years old.
METHODS: A total of 92 boys with a mean age of 15.8 years (range 11 to 18) underwent microsurgical subinguinal varicocelectomy because of ipsilateral testicular hypotrophy (n = 63), pain, or parental preference. The varicoceles were grade III in 82 (89.1%) and grade II in 10 (10.9%) boys. Microsurgery was assisted by an operating microscope (10x to 25x) and Doppler probe. All boys were discharged home on the same day of surgery.
RESULTS: Of the 92 patients, 78 attended the initial postoperative visit at 1 month and 61 attended the 1-year follow-up visit. At 1 year, 40 (65.6%) of 61 testes demonstrated catch-up growth, with no evidence of testicular loss or persistent hypotrophy in the other 21. The only complication was persistent scrotal pain in 1 patient. At 1 year of follow-up, 1 patient (1.6%) had a recurrence and no patients had hydrocele formation or evidence of testicular loss or persistent hypotrophy.
CONCLUSIONS: Microsurgical subinguinal varicocelectomy is a safe, effective, and minimally invasive treatment modality in children and adolescents.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16904464     DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2006.02.022

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urology        ISSN: 0090-4295            Impact factor:   2.649


  10 in total

Review 1.  Management of hydrocele in adolescent patients.

Authors:  Marcello Cimador; Marco Castagnetti; Enrico De Grazia
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2010-06-15       Impact factor: 14.432

Review 2.  The role of testicular artery in laparoscopic varicocelectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Xiaokang Qi; Kunpeng Wang; Guangchen Zhou; Zhen Xu; Junjie Yu; Wei Zhang
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2016-03-12       Impact factor: 2.370

Review 3.  Current management of the adolescent varicocele.

Authors:  Patricio C Gargollo; David A Diamond
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 3.092

4.  Microsurgical intermediate subinguinal varicocelectomy.

Authors:  Joo Yong Lee; Ho Song Yu; Won Sik Ham; Dong Hyuk Kang; Kyu Hyun Kim; Doo Yong Chung; Kang Su Cho
Journal:  Int Surg       Date:  2014 Jul-Aug

5.  Effect of performing varicocelectomy before intracytoplasmic sperm injection on clinical outcomes in non-azoospermic males.

Authors:  Mehmet Ilker Gokce; Omer Gülpınar; Evren Süer; Murat Mermerkaya; Kaan Aydos; Onder Yaman
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2013-02-08       Impact factor: 2.370

6.  The significance of age on success of surgery for patients with varicocele.

Authors:  Berkan Reşorlu; Cengiz Kara; Erhan Sahin; Ali Unsal
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2009-06-09       Impact factor: 2.370

7.  Microsurgical ligation for painful varicocele: effectiveness and predictors of pain resolution.

Authors:  Hyun Tae Kim; Phil Hyun Song; Ki Hak Moon
Journal:  Yonsei Med J       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 2.759

8.  Symptomatic male with subclinical varicocele found on ultrasound evaluation.

Authors:  Ahmad Majzoub; Edmund Sabanegh
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2016 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.285

9.  Practice patterns in the surgical approach for adolescent varicocelectomy.

Authors:  Miriam Harel; Katherine W Herbst; Eric Nelson
Journal:  Springerplus       Date:  2015-12-14

Review 10.  The varicocele: diagnostic dilemmas, therapeutic challenges and future perspectives.

Authors:  Koji Chiba; Ranjith Ramasamy; Dolores J Lamb; Larry I Lipshultz
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2016 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.285

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.