Oliveros RJ, Lin Mei-Chun, Cabrera VM, Cayetano MJ, Ocaña GJ, Ocaña DJ, Acosta BD

Language: Spanish
References: 20
Page: 57-63
PDF size: 247.92 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: a varicocele is the abnormal dilatation of the pampiniform plexus, incidence varies according to age between 4 and 15% Objective: compare the results of varicocele treatment using open vs laparoscopic technique in children and teenagers. Methods: this study was performed in the Dr. Roberto Gilbert Elizalde Children´s Hospital in Guayaquil (Ecuador) from January 2015 to December 2020. It is a retrospective, descriptive, cross sectional study. Patients included were between 0 and 18 years old, had a diagnosis of varicocele, and open (Subinguinal) or laparoscopic technique (Palomo) had been performed. Results: 70 patients were included, in all of them the left side was affected. The mean age was 13.93 years. 61 (87%) patients had stage III varicocele and the remaining 9, stage II. Laparoscopic technique was used in 36 (51%) patients and open surgery technique in 34 (49%). The average duration for laparoscopic technique was 58.89 min, for open surgery technique it was 53.38 min. All patients were discharged the same day of surgery. In the laparoscopic technique group 2 (5.6%) developed a hydrocele. 1(2.8%) had a varicocele relapse. In the open surgery technique group 1 (2.9%) patient developed hydrocele. Conclusion: this is the first study in Ecuador comparing open vs laparoscopic technique as treatment options for varicocele. Both of these options show a good outcome, nonetheless, the decision to use either technique depends on the surgeons experience and the availability of the necessary technological tools found in each hospital.

REFERENCES

1. Parrilli A, Roberti A, Escolino M, Esposito C. Surgical approaches for varicocele in pediatric patient. TranslPediatr. 2016; 5(4): 227-232. doi:10.21037/tp.2016.09.11.

2. Silay MS, Hoen L, Quadackaers J, Undre S, Bogaert G, Dogan HS, et al. Treatment of Varicocele in Childrenand Adolescents: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis from the European Association of Urology/European Society for Paediatric Urology Guidelines Panel. Eur Urol. 2019; 75(3): 448-461.doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.09.042.

3. Akbay E, Cayan S, Doruk E, Duce MN, Bozlu M. The prevalence of varicocele and varicocele-related testicularatrophy in Turkish children and adolescents. BJU Int. 2000; 86(4): 490-493.doi: 10.1046/j.1464-410x.2000.00735.x.

4. Simal I, Parente A, García-Saavedra S, Prada-Arias M, Burgos L, Ortiz R, et al. Tratamiento laparoscópico delvaricocele en adolescentes. Acta Pediatr Esp. 2019; 77(5-6): 113-117.

5. Calderón PV, Angulo MJ, Soto BC, Pérez RN, Ávila RL, Rodríguez GJ, et al. Valoración del crecimiento testiculartras el tratamiento del varicocele en la infancia y adolescencia en función de la técnica empleada(Palomo, Ivanissevich y embolización). Cir Pediatr. 2016;29(4):175-179.

6. Yehya A, Abdalrazek M, Gamaan I, Fathy A, El Batal W. Lymphatic sparing laparoscopic varicocelectomywith or without testicular artery preservation: is there a difference?. Ann Pediatr Surg. 2020; 16:16.doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s43159-020-00030-2.

7. Cárdenas M, Castelló M, Loret E. Tratamiento quirúrgico laparoscópico versus abierto del varicocele enadolescentes. Rev. Cubana Urol. 2018;7(2):60-69.

8. Shetty AS, Prabakaran B, Bharath A. A Clinical study and management of varicocele. Int J Science Res.2016;5(4):1267-71.

9. Sack BS, Schäfer M, Kurtz MP. The Dilemma of Adolescent Varicoceles: Do They Really Have to Be Repaired?.Curr Urol Rep. 2017;18(5):38. doi: 10.1007/s11934-017-0686-7.

10. Camoglio FS, Cervellione RM, Dipaola G. Idiopathic varicocele in children. Epidemiological study and surgicalapproach. Minerva UrolNefrol. 2001; 53(4):189-93.

11. Shiraishi K, Oka S, Matsuyama H. Surgical comparison of subinguinal and high inguinal microsurgicalvaricocelectomy for adolescent varicocele. Int J Urol. 2016; 23(4): 338-342. doi: 10.1111/iju.13050.

12. Spinelli C, Strambi S, Busetto M, Rossi L, Piscioneri J, Pucci A, et al. Microsurgical inguinal varicocelectomyin adolescents: delivered versus not delivered testis procedure. Can J Urol. 2016; 23(2):8254-8259.

13. Gómez O, Garrido JI, García A, Escassi A, Vargas V, Lasso CE, et al. Cirugía abierta, Palomo laparoscópicoy embolización en niños con varicocele. Cir Pediatr. 2013; 26: 9-12.

14. Akkoç A, Aydın C, Topaktaş R, Altın S, Uçar M, Topçuoğlu M, et al. Retroperitoneal high ligation versus subinguinalvaricocelectomy: Effectiveness of two different varicocelectomy techniques on the treatmentof painful varicocele. Andrologia. 2019; 51(7): e13293. doi: 10.1111/and.13293.

15. Pastuszak AW, Kumar V, Shah A, Roth DR. Diagnostic and management approaches to pediatric and adolescentvaricocele: a survey of pediatric urologists. Urology. 2014; 84(2): 450-5.doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2014.04.022.

16. Maheshwari R, Mandia R, Malik P, Haldeniya K, Harish NL. Comparison of laparoscopic and open highligationprocedure for varicocele. Global J Med Res. 2014; XIV(5):22-6.

17. Jukic M, Todoric M, Todoric J, Susnjar T, Pogorelic Z. Laparoscopic Versus Open High Ligation for AdolescentVaricocele: A 6-year Single Center Study. Indian Pediatr. 2019; 56(8):653-658.

18. Macey MR, Owen RC, Ross SS, Coward RM. Best practice in the diagnosis and treatment of varicocele inchildren and adolescents. Ther Adv Urol. 2018; 10(9): 273-282. doi: 10.1177/1756287218783900.

19. Lurvey R, Durbin-Johnson B, Kurzrock EA. Adolescent varicocele: A large multicenter analysis of complicationsand recurrence in academic programs. J Pediatr Urol. 2015; 11(4): 186.e1-6.doi: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2015.05.003.

20. Capolicchio JP, El-Sherbiny M, Brzezinski A, Eassa W, Jednak R. Dye-assisted lymphatic-sparing laparoscopicvaricocelectomy in children. J Pediatr Urol. 2013; 9(1): 33-37. doi: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2011.11.004.