BACKGROUND/ PURPOSE: The management of intra-abdominal testis has been controversial but has changed significantly since the introduction of the laparoscopic technique. The aim of our study was to evaluate the success rate of laparoscopic orchidopexy (LO) compared with that of open orchidopexy (OO). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In Kuopio University Hospital, 35 of 357 children with undescended testes treated between January 1992 and December 2004 had intra-abdominal testes. A retrospective review was performed to compare the outcomes of children having LO with those who had undergone OO. RESULTS: Sixteen children with 19 intra-abdominal testes underwent LO and 18 children with 18 intra-abdominal testes underwent OO. Primary LO was performed in 14 children with 17 testes and staged Fowler-Stephens LO in 2 children. One LO was converted to OO. The mean (+/- standard deviation) operating time was 62 (+/- 30) minutes in the LO group and 43 (+/- 12) minutes in the OO-group (mean difference of 19 minutes, 95% confidence interval of the difference of 2 to 34 minutes; P = 0.025). There were no differences in the length of hospital stay between the two groups. Two major intra-abdominal complications occurred: 1 child in the LO-group had spermatic vessels torn, which led to a one-stage Fowler-Stephens orchidopexy, and the other child, one who had undergone a conversion from LO to OO, had a transection of the vas. One child in both groups was lost to follow-up. The overall success rate (acceptable scrotal position of the testis without testicular atrophy) was 88% in the LO group and 82% in the OO group. CONCLUSIONS: Although marginally longer in duration, primary LO appears to be a feasible, safe technique for the management of the low intra-abdominal testes, whereas the staged Fowler-Stephens LO may be more safe than primary LO in cases with high intra-abdominal testes.
BACKGROUND/ PURPOSE: The management of intra-abdominal testis has been controversial but has changed significantly since the introduction of the laparoscopic technique. The aim of our study was to evaluate the success rate of laparoscopic orchidopexy (LO) compared with that of open orchidopexy (OO). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In Kuopio University Hospital, 35 of 357 children with undescended testes treated between January 1992 and December 2004 had intra-abdominal testes. A retrospective review was performed to compare the outcomes of children having LO with those who had undergone OO. RESULTS: Sixteen children with 19 intra-abdominal testes underwent LO and 18 children with 18 intra-abdominal testes underwent OO. Primary LO was performed in 14 children with 17 testes and staged Fowler-Stephens LO in 2 children. One LO was converted to OO. The mean (+/- standard deviation) operating time was 62 (+/- 30) minutes in the LO group and 43 (+/- 12) minutes in the OO-group (mean difference of 19 minutes, 95% confidence interval of the difference of 2 to 34 minutes; P = 0.025). There were no differences in the length of hospital stay between the two groups. Two major intra-abdominal complications occurred: 1 child in the LO-group had spermatic vessels torn, which led to a one-stage Fowler-Stephens orchidopexy, and the other child, one who had undergone a conversion from LO to OO, had a transection of the vas. One child in both groups was lost to follow-up. The overall success rate (acceptable scrotal position of the testis without testicular atrophy) was 88% in the LO group and 82% in the OO group. CONCLUSIONS: Although marginally longer in duration, primary LO appears to be a feasible, safe technique for the management of the low intra-abdominal testes, whereas the staged Fowler-Stephens LO may be more safe than primary LO in cases with high intra-abdominal testes.