| Literature DB >> 31235709 |
Junhao Lei1, Chunhua Luo1,2, Yangyang Zhang1, Yuming Guo1, Xinjun Su3, Xinghuan Wang4,5.
Abstract
This paper was aimed to introduce and compare outcomes of a novel "Su-Wang (S-W) technique" for endoscopic treatment of adult hydrocele with conventional open hydrocelectomy with "Jaboulay's (JA) procedure" regarding adverse events (AEs) and patient satisfaction. In the randomized controlled trial, adult males with primary hydroceles were prospectively assigned into S-W or JA group. We recorded perioperative data and postoperative AEs (incision length, recurrence, hematoma, wound infection and edema vanished time). Finally, a total of 42 adult patients underwent the S-W (n = 22) or JA (n = 20) procedure. Procedures were successfully completed for all 42 patients. No significant differences were found between the two groups regarding age, symptom duration, body mass index, and size of the hydrocele. The incision length was significantly shorter in the S-W group (1.00 ± 0.24 cm) than in the JA group (6.10 ± 1.46 cm). After 6 months' follow-up, complete data of 90.5% (38/42) were obtained. Severe AEs did not occur in any patient. Recurrence, hematoma, wound infection, edema vanished time values, and satisfaction in the S-W group were superior to those in the JA group. All patients in the S-W group were satisfied with this novel procedure, particularly due to the minimally invasive incision. In conclusion, the novel "S-W technique" for hydrocelectomy provided satisfactory cosmetic results with a 1-cm scrotal incision only. With the near-complete excision of the parietal TV, it resulted in no recurrence, fewer AEs, and rapid postoperative rehabilitation in comparison to the traditional "JA procedure." The endoscopic "S-W technique" may be a viable alternative for the surgical treatment of adult primary vaginal hydrocele.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31235709 PMCID: PMC6591509 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-45229-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1The instruments used for the “Su-Wang technique”. (A) The self-made working sheath. Its tail can insert into the vaginal cavity through the incision made at the scrotum, and can be steadily fixed to the parietal layer of the tunica vaginalis. Please also refer to Fig. 2b. Its cavity can be inserted by B. (B) AUTOKLAV (KARL STORZ, Germany) was used for scrotoscopy because no specialized devices were available. The device comprises a percutaneous mini-nephrolithotomy instrument set designed for the endoscopic treatment of kidney stones. It contains an endoscope and a working irrigation channel. (C) Connected to light source. (D) Connected to display screen. (E) Plasma cylindrical electrode (PCE). (F) Connected to the irrigation solution (normal saline).
Figure 2The main procedures for the “Su-Wang technique”. (a) TV: Tunica vaginalis was shown with a white arrow. A transverse incision of approximately 1 cm in length was made at the anterior, superior part of the scrotum. Then, the skin, dartos, and superficial fascia of the scrotum were cut layer by layer, until the parietal TV was exposed. (b) S: Sheath. The tail of the self-made working sheath was passed through the incision into the cavity of the TV, steadily fixed at the parietal layer. (c,d) The endoscopic view and schematic diagram of “Su-Wang technique”. T: Testis. TV: Tunica vaginalis. PCE: Plasma cylindrical electrode. RDL: The Red Dotted Line indicated the marker line. SC: Spermatic cord. E: Epididymis. S: Sheath. A PCE was used to burn a circle at the parietal TV to serve as a marker. The distance between the burned area and the testis or epididymis was 1–2 cm. The parietal TV was burned along the circular marker with the PCE. The burning depth penetrated the parietal TV only, without reaching the deep fascial layer of the scrotal wall. (e,f) Sc: Scrotum. TV: Tunica vaginalis. S: Sheath. The adhesion between the parietal TV and the deep fascial layer of the scrotal wall was bluntly separated, stripping the parietal TV completely. During the dissection procedure, electrocoagulation was used to stop bleeding when necessary. (g) An incision about 1 cm long was left in the scrotum immediately after the procedures (shown with a red arrow).
Figure 3The CONSORT flowchart of the patients through each stage of the study.
Baseline, perioperative and follow-up data when compared “Su-Wang technique” with “Jaboulay’s procedure” for adult primary vaginal hydrocele.
| Items | SW (n = 22) | JA (n = 20) | P (2-sided) |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Age (years) | 60.00 ± 13.86 | 60.10 ± 13.80 | 0.981 |
| Body mass index (BMI) | 24.03 ± 3.98 | 24.14 ± 2.88 | 0.917 |
| Symptom duration (mons) | 12.27 ± 25.00 | 13.00 ± 23.82 | 0.924 |
| Size of hydrocele (ml) | 142.98 ± 100.15 | 136.57 ± 88.06 | 0.827 |
|
| |||
| Blood loss (ml) | NA | 12.15 ± 5.11 | NA |
| Operation time (min) | 55.50 ± 6.26 | 46.82 ± 7.95 | <0.001 |
| Incision length (cm) | 1.00 ± 0.24 | 6.10 ± 1.46 | <0.001 |
| Hospital stay (days) | 3 | 3 | — |
| Return to daily activities (days) | 3.00 ± 1.08 | 5.72 ± 1.53 | <0.001 |
|
| |||
| Recurrence | 0/20* | 4/18* | 0.041& |
| Wound infection | 0/20 | 1/18 | 0.474& |
| Hematoma | 0/20 | 2/18 | 0.218& |
| Edema | 6/20 | 13/18 | 0.022 |
| Edema vanished time (days) | 2.50 ± 1.19 | 4.56 ± 1.46 | <0.001 |
| Satisfaction percent (%) | 100% (20/20) | 83.3% (14/18) | 0.041& |
SW: Su-Wang technique. JA: Jaboulay’s procedure. Data are showed as means ± standard deviations. P< 0.05 was considered to reflect a significant difference. NA: Not applicable. *Two cases in the SW group and two cases in the JA group could not be connected during follow-up, so the total patients that providing the follow-up data were 20 and 18 cases for each group. & Fish’s Exact Test was used for the comparisons in this table because total N = 38 < 40.
The severity grading & of adverse events occurred in “Su-Wang” and “Jaboulay” groups.
| AEs$ | SW | JA | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade I | Grade II | Grade III | Grade I | Grade II | Grade III | |
| Wound infection (N = 1) | — | — | — | — | 1# | — |
| Edema (N = 19)^ | 6 | — | — | 13 | — | — |
| Hematoma (N = 2)^ | 0 | — | — | 2 | — | — |
&The severity of each AE was graded based on the Clavien/Dindo classification. #One case with wound infection recovered after the application of antibiotics for one week and wound dressing. ^All the cases suffered edema or hematoma recovered spontaneously without any intervention less than one week. $Adverse events. Grade I: Any deviation from the normal postoperative course without the need for pharmacological treatment or surgical, endoscopic, and radiological interventions. Allowed therapeutic regimens are: drugs as antiemetics, antipyretics, analgetics, diuretics, electrolytes, and physiotherapy. This grade also includes wound infections opened at the bedside. Grade II: Requiring pharmacological treatment with drugs other than such allowed for grade I complications. Blood transfusions and total parenteral nutrition are also included. Grade III: Requiring surgical, endoscopic or radiological intervention. Grade IIIa Intervention not under general anesthesia; Grade IIIb Intervention under general anesthesia. Grade IV: Life-threatening complication requiring IC/ICU management. Grade IVa Single organ dysfunction (including dialysis); Grade IVb Multiorgan dysfunction. Grade V: Death of a patient.