Home  |   Archive  |   Online Submission  |   News & Events  |   Subscribe  |   APFA  |   Society  |   Contact Us  |   中文版
Search   
 
Journal

Ahead of print
Authors' Accepted
    Manuscripts
new!
Current Issue
Archive
Acknowledgments
Special Issues
Browse by Category

Manuscript Submission

Online Submission
Online Review
Instruction for Authors
Instruction for Reviewers
English Corner new!

About AJA

About AJA
Editorial Board
Contact Us
News

Resources & Services

Advertisement
Subscription
Email alert
Proceedings
Reprints

Download area

Copyright licence
EndNote style file
Manuscript word template
Guidance for AJA figures
    preparation (in English)

Guidance for AJA figures
    preparation (in Chinese)

Proof-reading for the
    authors

AJA Club (in English)
AJA Club (in Chinese)

 
Abstract

Volume 10, Issue 1 (January 2008) 10, 146–148; 10.1111/j.1745-7262.2008.00354.x

Initial experience with robot-assisted varicocelectomy

Tung Shu, Shaya Taghechian and Run Wang

1.Vanguard Urologic Institute Houston, Houston, TX 77030, USA
2.Division of Urology, University of Texas Medical School at Houston, TX 77030, USA
3.Department of Urology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA

Correspondence: Run Wang, MD, FACS, Departments of Urology, University of Texas Medical School at Houston and University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 6431 Fannin Street, MSB 6.018, Houston, TX 77030, USA. Fax: +1-713-500-0546. E-mail: run.wang@uth.tmc.edu

Abstract

Aim: To determine if robot-assisted varicocelectomy can be safely and effectively performed when compared to microscopic inguinal varicocelectomy.

Methods: Eight patients aged 29.1 ± 12.5 years underwent microscopic subinguinal varicocelectomies: seven patients with left-sided repair, and one patient with bilateral repair. Eight patients aged 22.0 ± 8.0 years underwent robot-assisted varicocelectomies: seven patients with left-sided repair and one patient with bilateral repair.

Results: The average operative time for microscopic inguinal varicocelectomy was 73.9 ± 12.2 min, whereas the robot-assisted technique took 71.1 ± 21.1 min. There were no difficulties in identifying and isolating vessels and the vas deferens with robot-assisted subinguinal varicocelectomy. Hand tremor was eliminated using the robotic procedure. Patients who underwent either microscopic or robot-assisted varicocelectomies were able to resume daily activities on the day of surgery and full activities within 2 weeks. There were no complications or recurrences of varicocele.

Conclusion: From our experience, compared to microscopic surgery, robot-assisted varicocelectomy can be safely and effectively performed, with the added benefit of eliminating hand tremor.

Keywords: varicocele, microscopic varicocelectomy, robot-assisted varicocelectomy

Full Text | PDF | 中文摘要 |

 
Browse:  3980
 
Asian Journal of Andrology CN 31-1795/R ISSN 1008-682X  Copyright © 2023  Shanghai Materia Medica, Chinese Academy of Sciences.  All rights reserved.