PURPOSE: To investigate the efficacy of therapeutic methods for recurrent epididymitis and neurovascular sparing vas clipping in refractory cases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifteen boys with recurrent epididymitis were enrolled: the first group (9) with primary structural anomalies and the second group (6) with voiding dysfunction without structural anomalies. Median age was 4 (29 months to 7 years) and 4.5 (6 months to 11 years) years, respectively. Mean follow up was 7.5 (2-11) and 5.2 (3.5-8) years, respectively. RESULTS: Urethrovasal reflux was detected in all patients of the first group except one. Endoscopic injection of bulking agent was successfully applied in three patients with no recurrent epididymitis. No further episodes of epididymitis were reported after valve ablation or clean intermittent catheterization. In four non-responders, vas clipping was successfully undertaken. Voiding dysfunction was the possible etiology of epididymitis but with no obvious urethrovasal reflux in the second group. No further episodes of epididymitis occurred using bladder retraining and medications for detrusor and sphincter relaxation. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that neurovascular sparing vas clipping can be used effectively in children with structural anomalies and urethrovasal reflux who have developed intractable epididymitis.
PURPOSE: To investigate the efficacy of therapeutic methods for recurrent epididymitis and neurovascular sparing vas clipping in refractory cases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifteen boys with recurrent epididymitis were enrolled: the first group (9) with primary structural anomalies and the second group (6) with voiding dysfunction without structural anomalies. Median age was 4 (29 months to 7 years) and 4.5 (6 months to 11 years) years, respectively. Mean follow up was 7.5 (2-11) and 5.2 (3.5-8) years, respectively. RESULTS: Urethrovasal reflux was detected in all patients of the first group except one. Endoscopic injection of bulking agent was successfully applied in three patients with no recurrent epididymitis. No further episodes of epididymitis were reported after valve ablation or clean intermittent catheterization. In four non-responders, vas clipping was successfully undertaken. Voiding dysfunction was the possible etiology of epididymitis but with no obvious urethrovasal reflux in the second group. No further episodes of epididymitis occurred using bladder retraining and medications for detrusor and sphincter relaxation. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that neurovascular sparing vas clipping can be used effectively in children with structural anomalies and urethrovasal reflux who have developed intractable epididymitis.