Lymphatic sparing laparoscopic varicocelectomy with or without testicular artery preservation: is there a difference?

被引:5
|
作者
Yehya, Abdelaziz [1 ,2 ]
Abdalrazek, Mohamed [1 ,2 ]
Gamaan, Ibrahim [1 ,2 ]
Fathy, Ahmed [3 ]
El Batal, Wael [3 ]
机构
[1] Al Azhar Univ, Dept Pediat Surg, Fac Med, Cairo, Egypt
[2] Al Azhar Univ, Dept Pediat Surg, Cairo, Egypt
[3] Natl Res Ctr, Cairo, Egypt
关键词
Laparoscopic varicocelectomy; Lymphatic sparing; Testicular artery preservation; PEDIATRIC VARICOCELE; CHILDREN; ADOLESCENTS; LIGATION; SURGERY;
D O I
10.1186/s43159-020-00030-2
中图分类号
R72 [儿科学];
学科分类号
100202 ;
摘要
Background: Lymphatic sparing laparoscopic Palomo varicocelectomy is a safe and reliable technique for varicocele treatment in adolescents and children. The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of lymphatic sparing laparoscopic varicocelectomy with and without testicular artery preservation. The prospective random allocation of selected patients was done at Al-Azhar University Hospital, Pediatric Surgery Department from February 2010 till January 2015. All patients underwent lymphatic sparing laparoscopic varicocelectomy and they were divided into two equal groups, group A underwent laparoscopic Palomo without testicular artery sparing and group B underwent the procedure with testicular artery sparing. The main outcome included operative time, postoperative hydrocele, and persistence of varicocele, together with catch-up testicular growth or testicular atrophy. Results: One hundred and sixty male patients presented with left-sided primary varicocele that was diagnosed clinically and affirmed by color Doppler ultrasonography. The mean age was 14.25 +/- 1.6 years (ranged 13-16 years). There was one case of persistent varicocele in group A, compared to 8 cases in group B with a statistically significant difference (p = 0.016). A significant difference had been found in the operative time (p = 0.001) between both groups. No hydrocele or testicular atrophy had been detected in both groups. No significant inter-group differences were seen in aspects of age, varicocele grade, and catch-up testicular growth. The mean follow-up period was 42 months (24-60 months). Conclusion: Lymphatic sparing laparoscopic Palomo varicocelectomy was superior to that with testicular artery preservation as regard varicocele persistence and operative time and hence is preferable for the management of primary pediatric varicocele.
引用
收藏
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Outcome of Lymphatic- and Artery-Sparing Surgery for Pediatric Varicocoele
    Healey, Costa
    Lisle, Rebecca
    Mahomed, Anies
    JOURNAL OF LAPAROENDOSCOPIC & ADVANCED SURGICAL TECHNIQUES, 2010, 20 (04): : 387 - 389
  • [22] The role of testicular artery in laparoscopic varicocelectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Xiaokang Qi
    Kunpeng Wang
    Guangchen Zhou
    Zhen Xu
    Junjie Yu
    Wei Zhang
    International Urology and Nephrology, 2016, 48 : 955 - 965
  • [23] Modified microsurgical subinguinal varicocelectomy without testicular delivery
    Kim, S. O.
    Chung, H. S.
    Park, K.
    ANDROLOGIA, 2011, 43 (06) : 405 - 408
  • [24] Dye assisted lymphatic sparing subinguinal varicocelectomy. A prospective randomized study
    Abd Ellatif, Mohamed E.
    El Nakeeb, Ayman
    Shoma, Ashraf M.
    Abbas, Ashraf E.
    Askar, Walleed
    Noman, Nashat
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2011, 9 (08) : 626 - 631
  • [25] Robotic-assisted laparoscopic artery-sparing varicocelectomy using indocyanine green fluorescence angiography: Initial experience
    Teng, Jingfei
    Jia, Zhuomin
    Ai, Xing
    Luo, Xiao
    Guan, Yawei
    Hao, Xuemei
    Fei, Weiwei
    ANDROLOGIA, 2020, 52 (11)
  • [26] Impact of internal spermatic artery preservation during laparoscopic varicocelectomy on recurrence and the catch-up growth rate in adolescents
    Kim, K. S.
    Lee, C.
    Song, S. H.
    Cho, S. J.
    Park, S.
    Moon, K. H.
    Ryu, D. S.
    Park, S.
    JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC UROLOGY, 2014, 10 (03) : 435 - 440
  • [27] Comparison between Microsurgical Subinguinal Varicocelectomy with and without Testicular Delivery for Infertile Men: Is Testicular Delivery an Unnecessary Procedure?
    Hou, Yi
    Zhang, Ying
    Zhang, Yun
    Huo, Wei
    Li, Hai
    UROLOGY JOURNAL, 2015, 12 (04) : 2261 - 2266
  • [28] Testicular Catch-up Growth After Varicocelectomy: Does Surgical Technique Make a Difference?
    Zampieri, Nicola
    Mantovani, Alberto
    Ottolenghl, Alberto
    Camoglio, Francesco Saverio
    UROLOGY, 2009, 73 (02) : 289 - 292
  • [29] Efficacy and Safety of Microsurgical Subinguinal Varicocelectomy with and without Testicular Delivery for Varicocele Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Liao, Bo
    Liu, Junbo
    Chen, Shuangquan
    Zhang, Qiang
    Xie, Chaofan
    Jiang, Guo
    Cui, Shu
    Wu, Tao
    UROLOGY JOURNAL, 2019, 16 (05) : 417 - 426
  • [30] Robotic-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic ICG-fluorescence lymphatic-sparing palomo varicocelectomy: a comparative retrospective study of techniques and outcomes
    Esposito, Ciro
    Leva, Ernesto
    Castagnetti, Marco
    Cerulo, Mariapina
    Cardarelli, Mery
    Del Conte, Fulvia
    Esposito, Giovanni
    Chiodi, Annalisa
    Chiarenza, Marco
    Di Mento, Claudia
    Escolino, Maria
    WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2024, 42 (01)