Comparison of open and laparoscopic varicocelectomies in terms of operative time, sperm parameters, and complications

Urology Journal

Volumn 6, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 170-174

  Shamsa, Ali ^a   Mohammadi, Leila ^a   Abolbashari, Mehran ^a   Shakeri, Mohammad Taghi ^a   Shamsa, Saeed ^a  

^a MASHHAD UNIVERSITY OF MEDICAL SCIENCES   (Iran)

Author keywords

Infertility; Laparoscopy; Varicocele

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; HUMAN; LAPAROSCOPY; MALE; MALE GENITAL SYSTEM SURGERY; METHODOLOGY; SPERMATOZOON; TIME; VARICOCELE;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; HUMANS; LAPAROSCOPY; MALE; SPERMATOZOA; TIME FACTORS; UROLOGIC SURGICAL PROCEDURES, MALE; VARICOCELE;

EID: 70349770573     PISSN: 17351308     EISSN: 1735546X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Hassan JM, Adams MC, Pope JCt, Demarco RT, Brock JW, 3rd. Hydrocele formation following laparoscopic varicocelectomy. J Urol. 2006;175:1076-9.
2. Kocvara R, Dvoracek J, Sedlacek J, Dite Z, Novak K. Lymphatic sparing laparoscopic varicocelectomy: a microsurgical repair. J Urol. 2005;173:1751-4.
3. Misseri R, Gershbein AB, Horowitz M, Glassberg KI. The adolescent varicocele. II: the incidence of hydrocele and delayed recurrent varicocele after varicocelectomy in a long-term follow-up. BJU Int. 2001;87:494-8.
4. Aaberg RA, Vancaillie TG, Schuessler WW. Laparoscopic varicocele ligation: a new technique. Fertil Steril. 1991;56:776-7.
5. Spink MS, Lewis GL. Albucasis on surgery and instruments. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1973. p 438.
6. Ghanem H, Anis T, El-Nashar A, Shamloul R. Subinguinal microvaricocelectomy versus retroperitoneal varicocelectomy: comparative study of complications and surgical outcome. Urology. 2004;64:1005-9.
7. Watanabe M, Nagai A, Kusumi N, Tsuboi H, Nasu Y, Kumon H. Minimal invasiveness and effectivity of subinguinal microscopic varicocelectomy: a comparative study with retroperitoneal high and laparoscopic approaches. Int J Urol. 2005;12:892-8.
8. Kwon ED, Sandlow JI, Donovan JF. Varix ligation. In: Smith AD, Badlani GH, Bagley DH, editors. Smith's textbook of endourology. 1st ed. St Louis: Quality Medical Publishing; 1996. p. 894-903.
9. Ogura K, Matsuda T, Terachi T, Horii Y, Takeuchi H, Yoshida O. Laparoscopic varicocelectomy: invasiveness and effectiveness compared with conventional open retroperitoneal high ligation. Int J Urol. 1994;1:62-6.
10. Al-Kandari AM, Shabaan H, Ibrahim HM, Elshebiny YH, Shokeir AA. Comparison of outcomes of different varicocelectomy techniques: open inguinal, laparoscopic, and subinguinal microscopic varicocelectomy: a randomized clinical trial. Urology. 2007;69:417-20.
11. Al-Said S, Al-Naimi A, Al-Ansari A, et al. Varicocelectomy for male infertility: a comparative study of open, laparoscopic and microsurgical approaches. J Urol. 2008;180:266-70.
12. Hirsch IH, Abdel-Meguid TA, Gomella LG. Postsurgical outcomes assessment following varicocele ligation: laparoscopic versus subinguinal approach. Urology. 1998;51:810-5.
13. Schwentner C, Oswald J, Lunacek A, Deibl M, Bartsch G, Radmayr C. Optimizing the outcome of microsurgical subinguinal varicocelectomy using isosulfan blue: a prospective randomized trial. J Urol. 2006;175:1049-52.