World J Mens Health.  2013 Apr;31(1):58-63.

Preoperative Predictors of Varicocelectomy Success in the Treatment of Testicular Pain

• Park YW
• Lee JH

Abstract

PURPOSE
We performed the present study to evaluate the prognostic factors for the surgical outcome of varicocelectomy in the treatment of a painful varicocele.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A total of 77 patients undergoing varicocelectomy were enrolled. All the patients were examined for body mass index (BMI), varicocele grade, testosterone, follicle stimulating hormone (FSH), luteinizing hormone (LH), semen analysis, maximal vein diameter, and discrepancy of testicular volume. At a follow-up visit 3~6 months after the surgery, the patient response was graded as a complete response, partial response, or no response. The resolution of pain was defined as a complete or partial response. We used logistic regression analyses to determine the preoperative factors for predicting a complete response and the resolution of pain.
RESULTS
Ten subjects were lost to follow-up. The remaining 67 patients were included in this study. The pain was completely resolved in 47.8% of patients, partial resolution was observed in 25.4% of patients, and failure was reported in 26.9% of patients. Among the parameters, only a longer duration of pain (> or =3 months) was an independent factor related to the complete response of pain (odds ratio, 7.371; p=0.010) and the resolution of pain (odds ratio, 7.209; p=0.042). The parameters of semen analysis results, testosterone, LH, FSH, BMI, grade, ultrasonography results, and the type of surgical approach did not significantly predict the resolution of pain.
CONCLUSIONS
The duration of pain (> or =3 months) was an independent prognostic factor for the complete response of pain and the resolution of pain.

Keyword

Varicocele; Pain; Laparoscopy; Microsurgery

MeSH Terms

Body Mass Index
Follicle Stimulating Hormone
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Laparoscopy
Logistic Models
Lost to Follow-Up
Luteinizing Hormone
Microsurgery
Semen Analysis
Testosterone
Varicocele
Veins
Follicle Stimulating Hormone
Luteinizing Hormone
Testosterone

Reference

1. Kass EJ, Marcol B. Results of varicocele surgery in adolescents: a comparison of techniques. J Urol. 1992; 148:694–696. PMID: 1640548.

2. Marmar JL, Kim Y. Subinguinal microsurgical varicocelectomy: a technical critique and statistical analysis of semen and pregnancy data. J Urol. 1994; 152:1127–1132. PMID: 8072081.

3. Peterson AC, Lance RS, Ruiz HE. Outcomes of varicocele ligation done for pain. J Urol. 1998; 159:1565–1567. PMID: 9554356.

4. Shridharani A, Lockwood G, Sandlow J. Varicocelectomy in the treatment of testicular pain: a review. Curr Opin Urol. 2012; 22:499–506. PMID: 22965318.

5. Altunoluk B, Soylemez H, Efe E, Malkoc O. Duration of preoperative scrotal pain may predict the success of microsurgical varicocelectomy. Int Braz J Urol. 2010; 36:55–59. PMID: 20202236.

6. Chen SS. Factors predicting symptomatic relief by varicocelectomy in patients with normospermia and painful varicocele nonresponsive to conservative treatment. Urology. 2012; 80:585–589. PMID: 22784493.

7. Kim HT, Song PH, Moon KH. Microsurgical ligation for painful varicocele: effectiveness and predictors of pain resolution. Yonsei Med J. 2012; 53:145–150. PMID: 22187245.

8. Park HJ, Lee SS, Park NC. Predictors of pain resolution after varicocelectomy for painful varicocele. Asian J Androl. 2011; 13:754–758. PMID: 21102471.

9. Lyon RP, Marshall S, Scott MP. Varicocele in childhood and adolescence: implication in adulthood infertility? Urology. 1982; 19:641–644. PMID: 7090115.

10. Sigman M, Jarow JP. Ipsilateral testicular hypotrophy is associated with decreased sperm counts in infertile men with varicoceles. J Urol. 1997; 158:605–607. PMID: 9224376.

11. Levine LA, Matkov TG, Lubenow TR. Microsurgical denervation of the spermatic cord: a surgical alternative in the treatment of chronic orchialgia. J Urol. 1996; 155:1005–1007. PMID: 8583547.

12. Yaman O, Ozdiler E, Anafarta K, Göğüş O. Effect of microsurgical subinguinal varicocele ligation to treat pain. Urology. 2000; 55:107–108. PMID: 10654904.

13. Al-Buheissi SZ, Patel HR, Wazait HD, Miller RA, Nathan S. Predictors of success in surgical ligation of painful varicocele. Urol Int. 2007; 79:33–36. PMID: 17627165.

14. Yeo JK. A comparative study of varicocelectomy for painful varicocele: modified palomo, laparoscopic approach and microscopic subinguinal approach. Korean J Androl. 2009; 27:201–205.

15. Lee MJ, Cho SH, Choi JY, Kim SB, Lee ST, Min SK. Significance of laparoscopic varicocelectomy. Korean J Androl. 2010; 28:209–216.