Loupe-assisted versus microscopic varicocelectomy: Is there an intraoperative anatomic difference?

Asian Journal of Andrology

Volumn 16, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 112-114

  Zhang, Hao ^a   Liu, Xiao Peng ^a   Yang, Xiao Jian ^a   Huang, Wen Tao ^a   Ruan, Xing Xing ^a   Xiao, Heng Jun ^a   Li, Liao Yuan ^a   Gao, Xin ^a   Zhang, Yan ^a  

^a THE THIRD AFFILIATED HOSPITAL OF SUN YAT SEN UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

intraoperative difference; loupe assisted; microscopic; varicocelectomy

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTERY DISSECTION; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; HUMAN; INTRAOPERATIVE PERIOD; LIGATION; LYMPH VESSEL; MALE; MICROSURGERY; SPERMATIC CORD; SPERMATIC VEIN; SURGICAL MICROSCOPE; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; VARICOCELE; VARICOCELECTOMY;

HUMANS; LIGATION; LYMPHATIC VESSELS; MALE; MICROSURGERY; SPERMATIC CORD; SURGICAL INSTRUMENTS; TESTIS; UROGENITAL SURGICAL PROCEDURES; VARICOCELE; VASCULAR SURGICAL PROCEDURES;

EID: 84891912304     PISSN: 1008682X     EISSN: 17457262     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.4103/1008-682X.122189     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. American Urological Association. Report on Varicocele and Infertility (2001) (Reviewed and validity confirmed 2012) Available from: http://www.auanet.org/common/pdf/education/clinical-guidance/Varicocele-Archive. pdf [Last accessed on 2013 Nov 10].
2. Jungwirth A, Giwercman A, Tournaye H, Diemer T, Kopa Z, et al. European Association of Urology guidelines on Male Infertility: the 2012 update. Eur Urol 2012; 62: 324-32.
3. Shridharani A, Lockwood G, Sandlow J. Varicocelectomy in the treatment of testicular pain: a review. Curr Opin Urol 2012; 22: 499-506.
4. Cayan S, Shavakhabov S, Kadioglu A. Treatment of palpable varicocele in infertile men: a meta-analysis to define the best technique. J Androl 2009; 30: 33-40.
5. Marmar JL, DeBenedictis TJ, Praiss D. The management of varicoceles by microdissection of the spermatic cord at the external inguinal ring. Fertil Steril 1985; 43: 583-8.
6. Goldstein M, Gilbert BR, Dicker A P, Dwosh J, Gnecco C. Microsurgical inguinal varicocelectomy with delivery of the testis: an artery and lymphatic sparing technique. J Urol 1992; 148: 1808-11.
7. Amelar RD. Early and late complications of inguinal varicocelectomy. J Urol 2003; 170 (2 Pt 1): 366-9.
8. Cayan S, Acar D, Ulger S, Akbay E. Adolescent varicocele repair: long-term results and comparison of surgical techniques according to optical magnification use in 100 cases at a single university hospital. J Urol 2005; 174: 2003-6.
9. Gontero P, Pretti G, Fontana F, Zitella A, Marchioro G, et al. Inguinal versus subinguinal varicocele vein ligation using magnifying loupe under local anesthesia: which technique is preferable in clinical practice? Urology 2005; 66: 1075-9.
10. Liu X, Zhang H, Ruan X, Xiao H, Huang W, et al. Macroscopic and microsurgical varicocelectomy: what's the intraoperative difference? World J Urol 2013; 31: 603-8.
11. Murray RR Jr, Mitchell SE, Kadir S, Kaufman SL, Chang R, et al. Comparison of recurrent varicocele anatomy following surgery and percutaneous balloon occlusion. J Urol 1986; 135: 286-9.
12. Szabo R, Kessler R. Hydrocele following internal spermatic vein ligation: a retrospective study and review of the literature. J Urol 1984; 132: 924-5.
13. Kocvara R, Dolezal J, Hampl R, Povýsil C, Dvorácek J, et al. Division of lymphatic vessels at varicocelectomy leads to testicular oedema and decline in testicular function according to the LH-RH analogue stimulation test. Eur Urol 2003; 43: 430-5.
14. Schwentner C, Radmayr C, Lunacek A, Gozzi C, Pinggera GM, et al. Laparoscopic varicocele ligation in children and adolescents using isosulphan blue: a prospective randomized trial. BJU Int 2006; 98: 861-5.
15. Diegidio P, Jhaveri JK, Ghannam S, Pinkhasov R, Shabsigh R, et al. Review of current varicocelectomy techniques and their outcomes. BJU Int 2011; 108: 1157-72.
16. Riccabona M, Oswald J, Koen M, Lusuardi L, Radmayr C, et al. Optimizing the operative treatment of boys with varicocele: sequential comparison of 4 techniques. J Urol 2003; 169: 666-8.
17. Zheng YQ, Zhang XB, Zhou JQ, Cheng F, Rao T, et al. The effects of artery-ligating and artery-preserving varicocelectomy on the ipsilateral testes in rats. Urology 2008; 72: 1179-84.
18. Zampieri N, Zuin V, Corroppolo M, Chironi C, Cervellione RM, et al. Varicocele and Adolescents: semen Quality after 2 Different Laparoscopic Procedures. J Androl 2007; 28: 727-33.
19. Chan PT, Wright EJ, Goldstein M. Incidence and postoperative outcomes of accidental ligation of the testicular artery during microsurgical varicocelectomy. J Urol 2005; 173: 482-4.
20. Cuda S P, Musser JE, Belnap CM, Thibault GP. Incidence and clinical significance of arterial injury in varicocele repair. BJU Int 2011; 107: 1635-7.
21. Silveri M, Adorisio O, Pane A, Colajacomo M, De Gennaro M. Subinguinal microsurgical ligation-its effectiveness in pediatric and adolescent varicocele. Scand J Urol Nephrol 2003; 37: 53-4.
22. Beck EM, Schlegel PN, Goldstein M. Intraoperative varicocele anatomy: a macroscopic and microscopic study. J Urol 1992; 148: 1190-4.
23. Cocuzza M, Pagani R, Coelho R, Srougi M, Hallak J. The systematic use of intraoperative vascular Doppler ultrasound during microsurgical subinguinal varicocelectomy improves precise identification and preservation of testicular blood supply. Fertil Steril 2010; 93: 2396-9.
24. Wang XK, Wang HZ, Fu DJ, Lai MK. Microanatomy of the spermatic cords during microsurgical inguinal varicocelectomy: initial experience in Asian men. Asian J Androl 2012; 14: 897-9.
25. Jarow JP, Ogle A, Kaspar J, Hopkins M. Testicular artery ramification within the inguinal canal. J Urol 1992; 147: 1290-2.
26. Mirilas P, Mentessidou A. Microsurgical subinguinal varicocelectomy in children, adolescents, and adults: surgical anatomy and anatomically justified technique. J Androl 2012; 33: 338-49.
27. Hopps CV, Lemer ML, Schlegel PN, Goldstein M. Intraoperative varicocele anatomy: a microscopic study of the inguinal versus subinguinal approach. J Urol 2003; 170 (6 Pt 1): 2366-70.