Loading…

Inguinal versus subinguinal varicocele vein ligation using magnifying loupe under local anesthesia: Which technique is preferable in clinical practice?

To compare the intraoperative results of inguinal versus subinguinal varicocelectomy using magnifying loupe, in terms of vein ligation and arterial preservation, recurrence rate, and patient tolerability. Ninety-nine patients were randomized to undergo a varicocele repair with an inguinal or a subin...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Urology (Ridgewood, N.J.) N.J.), 2005-11, Vol.66 (5), p.1075-1079
Main Authors: Gontero, Paolo, Pretti, Giuliano, Fontana, Francesco, Zitella, Andrea, Marchioro, Giansilvio, Frea, Bruno
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c393t-250359d335fb735ca363846fbcfbe7fed9a56d094177a72ec2e981a6783357b73
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c393t-250359d335fb735ca363846fbcfbe7fed9a56d094177a72ec2e981a6783357b73
container_end_page 1079
container_issue 5
container_start_page 1075
container_title Urology (Ridgewood, N.J.)
container_volume 66
creator Gontero, Paolo
Pretti, Giuliano
Fontana, Francesco
Zitella, Andrea
Marchioro, Giansilvio
Frea, Bruno
description To compare the intraoperative results of inguinal versus subinguinal varicocelectomy using magnifying loupe, in terms of vein ligation and arterial preservation, recurrence rate, and patient tolerability. Ninety-nine patients were randomized to undergo a varicocele repair with an inguinal or a subinguinal approach under local anesthesia. Data concerning the number of veins ligated and arterial preservation were recorded during each procedure. The amount of intraoperative and postoperative pain was assessed by means of visual analogue scale (VAS) scores. The recurrence rate was documented by color Doppler ultrasound examination. The average number of ligated veins was 5.6 with a subinguinal dissection and 4.4 with the inguinal approach. Inadvertent injury of the spermatic artery occurred in 6 of 47 subinguinal and 3 of 50 inguinal dissections; the artery could not be identified during 2 subinguinal and 1 inguinal dissection. Recurrent varicocele was detected in 8% and 14.9% of patients after an inguinal and a subinguinal approach, respectively. The intraoperative VAS score was significantly higher in the inguinal than in the subinguinal patients ( P = 0.008). In our hands, the inguinal approach to the spermatic cord showed a trend toward an easier preservation of the artery and a reduced incidence of persistent pathologic vein reflux. The subinguinal approach had a lower degree of intraoperative pain. On the whole, an inguinal repair might be preferable when magnifying loupe are used for varicocelectomy.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.urology.2005.05.009
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_68800433</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0090429505006473</els_id><sourcerecordid>68800433</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c393t-250359d335fb735ca363846fbcfbe7fed9a56d094177a72ec2e981a6783357b73</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkc-KFDEQxoMo7rj6CEoueusx6UySjpdlWfyzsOBF8RjS6eqZGnrSbdJZmCfxdU0zjXsUClJUfl_lSxUhbznbcsbVx-M2x3EY9-dtzZjcLsHMM7LhstaVMUY-J5tSYdWuNvKKvErpyBhTSumX5IqrulG81hvy5z7sMwY30EeIKSeacov_Si6iHz0MUG4x0AH3bsYx0JwKQ09uH7A_L-kw5gloDh3EkvuidQHSfICE7hP9dUB_oDP4Q8DfGSgmOkXoIbq2tC6N_YABF9UUnZ_Rw81r8qJ3Q4I363lNfn75_OPuW_Xw_ev93e1D5YURc1VLJqTphJB9q4X0TijR7FTf-r4F3UNnnFQdMzuutdM1-BpMw53STZHoIrkmHy59pzgWa2m2J0zlx0PxP-ZkVdMwthOigPIC-jimVNzbKeLJxbPlzC4bsUe7bsQuG7FLMFN079YHcnuC7km1rqAA71fApTKCPrrgMT1xum50Yxbu5sJBGccjQrTJIwQPHUbws-1G_I-VvzRPsJU</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>68800433</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Inguinal versus subinguinal varicocele vein ligation using magnifying loupe under local anesthesia: Which technique is preferable in clinical practice?</title><source>ScienceDirect Freedom Collection</source><creator>Gontero, Paolo ; Pretti, Giuliano ; Fontana, Francesco ; Zitella, Andrea ; Marchioro, Giansilvio ; Frea, Bruno</creator><creatorcontrib>Gontero, Paolo ; Pretti, Giuliano ; Fontana, Francesco ; Zitella, Andrea ; Marchioro, Giansilvio ; Frea, Bruno</creatorcontrib><description>To compare the intraoperative results of inguinal versus subinguinal varicocelectomy using magnifying loupe, in terms of vein ligation and arterial preservation, recurrence rate, and patient tolerability. Ninety-nine patients were randomized to undergo a varicocele repair with an inguinal or a subinguinal approach under local anesthesia. Data concerning the number of veins ligated and arterial preservation were recorded during each procedure. The amount of intraoperative and postoperative pain was assessed by means of visual analogue scale (VAS) scores. The recurrence rate was documented by color Doppler ultrasound examination. The average number of ligated veins was 5.6 with a subinguinal dissection and 4.4 with the inguinal approach. Inadvertent injury of the spermatic artery occurred in 6 of 47 subinguinal and 3 of 50 inguinal dissections; the artery could not be identified during 2 subinguinal and 1 inguinal dissection. Recurrent varicocele was detected in 8% and 14.9% of patients after an inguinal and a subinguinal approach, respectively. The intraoperative VAS score was significantly higher in the inguinal than in the subinguinal patients ( P = 0.008). In our hands, the inguinal approach to the spermatic cord showed a trend toward an easier preservation of the artery and a reduced incidence of persistent pathologic vein reflux. The subinguinal approach had a lower degree of intraoperative pain. On the whole, an inguinal repair might be preferable when magnifying loupe are used for varicocelectomy.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0090-4295</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1527-9995</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2005.05.009</identifier><identifier>PMID: 16286127</identifier><identifier>CODEN: URGYAZ</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York, NY: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Adult ; Anesthesia, Local ; Biological and medical sciences ; Groin ; Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics ; Humans ; Ligation - instrumentation ; Ligation - methods ; Male ; Male genital diseases ; Medical sciences ; Nephrology. Urinary tract diseases ; Non tumoral diseases ; Testis - blood supply ; Varicocele - surgery ; Vascular Surgical Procedures - methods ; Veins</subject><ispartof>Urology (Ridgewood, N.J.), 2005-11, Vol.66 (5), p.1075-1079</ispartof><rights>2005 Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>2006 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c393t-250359d335fb735ca363846fbcfbe7fed9a56d094177a72ec2e981a6783357b73</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c393t-250359d335fb735ca363846fbcfbe7fed9a56d094177a72ec2e981a6783357b73</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27923,27924</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=17287897$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16286127$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Gontero, Paolo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pretti, Giuliano</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fontana, Francesco</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zitella, Andrea</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Marchioro, Giansilvio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Frea, Bruno</creatorcontrib><title>Inguinal versus subinguinal varicocele vein ligation using magnifying loupe under local anesthesia: Which technique is preferable in clinical practice?</title><title>Urology (Ridgewood, N.J.)</title><addtitle>Urology</addtitle><description>To compare the intraoperative results of inguinal versus subinguinal varicocelectomy using magnifying loupe, in terms of vein ligation and arterial preservation, recurrence rate, and patient tolerability. Ninety-nine patients were randomized to undergo a varicocele repair with an inguinal or a subinguinal approach under local anesthesia. Data concerning the number of veins ligated and arterial preservation were recorded during each procedure. The amount of intraoperative and postoperative pain was assessed by means of visual analogue scale (VAS) scores. The recurrence rate was documented by color Doppler ultrasound examination. The average number of ligated veins was 5.6 with a subinguinal dissection and 4.4 with the inguinal approach. Inadvertent injury of the spermatic artery occurred in 6 of 47 subinguinal and 3 of 50 inguinal dissections; the artery could not be identified during 2 subinguinal and 1 inguinal dissection. Recurrent varicocele was detected in 8% and 14.9% of patients after an inguinal and a subinguinal approach, respectively. The intraoperative VAS score was significantly higher in the inguinal than in the subinguinal patients ( P = 0.008). In our hands, the inguinal approach to the spermatic cord showed a trend toward an easier preservation of the artery and a reduced incidence of persistent pathologic vein reflux. The subinguinal approach had a lower degree of intraoperative pain. On the whole, an inguinal repair might be preferable when magnifying loupe are used for varicocelectomy.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Anesthesia, Local</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Groin</subject><subject>Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Ligation - instrumentation</subject><subject>Ligation - methods</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Male genital diseases</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Nephrology. Urinary tract diseases</subject><subject>Non tumoral diseases</subject><subject>Testis - blood supply</subject><subject>Varicocele - surgery</subject><subject>Vascular Surgical Procedures - methods</subject><subject>Veins</subject><issn>0090-4295</issn><issn>1527-9995</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2005</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkc-KFDEQxoMo7rj6CEoueusx6UySjpdlWfyzsOBF8RjS6eqZGnrSbdJZmCfxdU0zjXsUClJUfl_lSxUhbznbcsbVx-M2x3EY9-dtzZjcLsHMM7LhstaVMUY-J5tSYdWuNvKKvErpyBhTSumX5IqrulG81hvy5z7sMwY30EeIKSeacov_Si6iHz0MUG4x0AH3bsYx0JwKQ09uH7A_L-kw5gloDh3EkvuidQHSfICE7hP9dUB_oDP4Q8DfGSgmOkXoIbq2tC6N_YABF9UUnZ_Rw81r8qJ3Q4I363lNfn75_OPuW_Xw_ev93e1D5YURc1VLJqTphJB9q4X0TijR7FTf-r4F3UNnnFQdMzuutdM1-BpMw53STZHoIrkmHy59pzgWa2m2J0zlx0PxP-ZkVdMwthOigPIC-jimVNzbKeLJxbPlzC4bsUe7bsQuG7FLMFN079YHcnuC7km1rqAA71fApTKCPrrgMT1xum50Yxbu5sJBGccjQrTJIwQPHUbws-1G_I-VvzRPsJU</recordid><startdate>20051101</startdate><enddate>20051101</enddate><creator>Gontero, Paolo</creator><creator>Pretti, Giuliano</creator><creator>Fontana, Francesco</creator><creator>Zitella, Andrea</creator><creator>Marchioro, Giansilvio</creator><creator>Frea, Bruno</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><general>Elsevier Science</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20051101</creationdate><title>Inguinal versus subinguinal varicocele vein ligation using magnifying loupe under local anesthesia: Which technique is preferable in clinical practice?</title><author>Gontero, Paolo ; Pretti, Giuliano ; Fontana, Francesco ; Zitella, Andrea ; Marchioro, Giansilvio ; Frea, Bruno</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c393t-250359d335fb735ca363846fbcfbe7fed9a56d094177a72ec2e981a6783357b73</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2005</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Anesthesia, Local</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Groin</topic><topic>Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Ligation - instrumentation</topic><topic>Ligation - methods</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Male genital diseases</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Nephrology. Urinary tract diseases</topic><topic>Non tumoral diseases</topic><topic>Testis - blood supply</topic><topic>Varicocele - surgery</topic><topic>Vascular Surgical Procedures - methods</topic><topic>Veins</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Gontero, Paolo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pretti, Giuliano</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fontana, Francesco</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zitella, Andrea</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Marchioro, Giansilvio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Frea, Bruno</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Urology (Ridgewood, N.J.)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Gontero, Paolo</au><au>Pretti, Giuliano</au><au>Fontana, Francesco</au><au>Zitella, Andrea</au><au>Marchioro, Giansilvio</au><au>Frea, Bruno</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Inguinal versus subinguinal varicocele vein ligation using magnifying loupe under local anesthesia: Which technique is preferable in clinical practice?</atitle><jtitle>Urology (Ridgewood, N.J.)</jtitle><addtitle>Urology</addtitle><date>2005-11-01</date><risdate>2005</risdate><volume>66</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>1075</spage><epage>1079</epage><pages>1075-1079</pages><issn>0090-4295</issn><eissn>1527-9995</eissn><coden>URGYAZ</coden><abstract>To compare the intraoperative results of inguinal versus subinguinal varicocelectomy using magnifying loupe, in terms of vein ligation and arterial preservation, recurrence rate, and patient tolerability. Ninety-nine patients were randomized to undergo a varicocele repair with an inguinal or a subinguinal approach under local anesthesia. Data concerning the number of veins ligated and arterial preservation were recorded during each procedure. The amount of intraoperative and postoperative pain was assessed by means of visual analogue scale (VAS) scores. The recurrence rate was documented by color Doppler ultrasound examination. The average number of ligated veins was 5.6 with a subinguinal dissection and 4.4 with the inguinal approach. Inadvertent injury of the spermatic artery occurred in 6 of 47 subinguinal and 3 of 50 inguinal dissections; the artery could not be identified during 2 subinguinal and 1 inguinal dissection. Recurrent varicocele was detected in 8% and 14.9% of patients after an inguinal and a subinguinal approach, respectively. The intraoperative VAS score was significantly higher in the inguinal than in the subinguinal patients ( P = 0.008). In our hands, the inguinal approach to the spermatic cord showed a trend toward an easier preservation of the artery and a reduced incidence of persistent pathologic vein reflux. The subinguinal approach had a lower degree of intraoperative pain. On the whole, an inguinal repair might be preferable when magnifying loupe are used for varicocelectomy.</abstract><cop>New York, NY</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>16286127</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.urology.2005.05.009</doi><tpages>5</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0090-4295
ispartof Urology (Ridgewood, N.J.), 2005-11, Vol.66 (5), p.1075-1079
issn 0090-4295
1527-9995
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_68800433
source ScienceDirect Freedom Collection
subjects Adult
Anesthesia, Local
Biological and medical sciences
Groin
Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics
Humans
Ligation - instrumentation
Ligation - methods
Male
Male genital diseases
Medical sciences
Nephrology. Urinary tract diseases
Non tumoral diseases
Testis - blood supply
Varicocele - surgery
Vascular Surgical Procedures - methods
Veins
title Inguinal versus subinguinal varicocele vein ligation using magnifying loupe under local anesthesia: Which technique is preferable in clinical practice?
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-11T03%3A28%3A35IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Inguinal%20versus%20subinguinal%20varicocele%20vein%20ligation%20using%20magnifying%20loupe%20under%20local%20anesthesia:%20Which%20technique%20is%20preferable%20in%20clinical%20practice?&rft.jtitle=Urology%20(Ridgewood,%20N.J.)&rft.au=Gontero,%20Paolo&rft.date=2005-11-01&rft.volume=66&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=1075&rft.epage=1079&rft.pages=1075-1079&rft.issn=0090-4295&rft.eissn=1527-9995&rft.coden=URGYAZ&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.urology.2005.05.009&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E68800433%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c393t-250359d335fb735ca363846fbcfbe7fed9a56d094177a72ec2e981a6783357b73%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=68800433&rft_id=info:pmid/16286127&rfr_iscdi=true