SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Androloji Bülteni / 2018 / Cilt: 20 - Sayı: 2

Diagnosis and treatment of recurrent varicocele

Rekürren varikosel tanı ve tedavisi

AHMET KARAKEÇİ
İRFAN ORHAN
Pages
49–53
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In this review, aetiology, diagnosis, treatment, and prognostic factors of varicocele is discussed in the light of current literature.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Recurrent varicocele is one of the most important complications after treatment of varicocele which is the most common treatable pathology in male infertility.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Detection rate of recurrent varicocele is 1–35%, and many parameters are involved in the diagnosis.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In this review, aetiology, diagnosis, treatment, and prognostic factors of varicocele is discussed in the light of current literature.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Recurrent varicocele is one of the most important complications after treatment of varicocele which is the most common treatable pathology in male infertility. Detection rate of recurrent varicocele is 1–35%, and many parameters are involved in the diagnosis. Even though not listed as a standard in the guidelines, evaluation, diagnosis, and treatment algorithm of recurrent varicocele is described and recommended in many studies. In this review, aetiology, diagnosis, treatment, and prognostic factors of varicocele is discussed in the light of current literature.

Özet

Erkek infertilitesinin en sık düzeltilebilir patolojisi olan varikosel tedavisi sonrası saptanabilecek önemli komplikasyonlarından biri rekürren varikoseldir. Saptanmasında pek çok parametrenin etkili olduğu rekürren varikosel, %1–35 oranlarında saptanabilmektedir. Değerlendirilme, tanı ve tedavi yöntemleri standart olarak kılavuzlarda ortaya konulmamış olmasına rağmen rekürren varikoseldeki algoritmik yaklaşım, çeşitli çalışmalarda standart olarak önerilmektedir. Bu derlemede varikosel etyolojisi, tanısı, tedavisi ve prognostik faktörleri kılavuzlar ve literatür eşliğinde tartışılmıştır

🔖

Cite This Article

KARAKEÇİ, A., ORHAN, İ. (2018). Diagnosis and treatment of recurrent varicocele. Androloji Bülteni, Cilt: 20 - Sayı: 2, 49–53. https://ajindex.com/articles/145088

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Rotker K, Sigman M. Recurrent varicocele. Asian J Androl 2016;18:229–33. [CrossRef] Steeno O, Knops J, Declerck L, Adimoelja A, van de Voorde H. Prevention of fertility disorders by detection and treatment of varicocele at school and college age. Andrologia 1976;8:47–53.
  2. Greenberg SH, Lipshultz LI, Wein AJ. Experience with 425 subfertile male patients. J Urol 1978;119:507–10.
  3. Jungwirth A, Diemer T, Kopa Z, Krausz C, Tournaye H. EAU Guidelines on Male Infertility. European Association of Urology; 2017. Erişim: https://uroweb.org/wp-content/uploads/17-MaleInfertility_2017_web.pdf
  4. Cayan S, Kadioglu TC, Tefekli A, Kadioglu A, Tellaloglu S. Comparison of results and complications of high ligation surgery and microsurgical high inguinal varicocelectomy in the treatment of varicocele. Urology 2000;55:750–4.
  5. 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. [CrossRef] 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. [CrossRef] Yavetz H, Levy R, Papo J, Yogev L, Paz G, Jaffa AJ, Homonnai ZT. Efficacy of varicocele embolization versus ligation of the left internal spermatic vein for improvement of sperm quality. Int J Androl 1992;15:338–44.
  6. Goldstein M, Gilbert BR, Dicker AP, 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. Jungwirth A, Gögüs C, Hauser G, Gomahr A, Schmeller N, Aulitzky W, Frick J. Clinical outcome of microsurgical subinguinal varicocelectomy in infertile men. Andrologia 2001;33:71–4.
  8. Mehan DJ, Andrus CH, Parra RO. Laparoscopic internal spermatic vein ligation: report of a new technique. Fertil Steril 1992;58:1263–6.
  9. Enquist E, Stein BS, Sigman M. Laparoscopic versus subinguinal varicocelectomy: a comparative study. Fertil Steril 1994;61:1092–6.
  10. Jarow JP, Assimos DG, Pittaway DE. Effectiveness of laparoscopic varicocelectomy. Urology 1993;42:544–7.
  11. Milad MF, Zein TA, Hussein EA, Ayyat FM, Schneider MP, Sant GR. Laparoscopic varicocelectomy for infertility. An initial report from Saudi Arabia. Eur Urol 1996;29:462–5.
  12. Nabi G, Asterlings S, Greene DR, Marsh RL. Percutaneous embolization of varicoceles: outcomes and c