Home  |  Archive  |  Online Submission  |  News & Events  |  Subscribe  |  APFA  |  Society  |  Links  |  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)

Links

Meetings
Journals
Societies & Institutes
Hospitals
Databases & Libraries
Companies
Websites
Other links

 
Abstract

Volume 19, Issue 1 (January 2017) 19, 34–38; DOI:10.4103/1008-682X.169994

Prospective randomized comparison of transumbilical two-port laparoscopic and conventional laparoscopic varicocele ligation

Guo-Xi Zhang, Jun Yang, Da-Zhi Long, Min Liu, Xiao-Feng Zou, Yuan-Hu Yuan, Ri-Hai Xiao, Yi-Jun Xue, Xin Zhong, Quan-Liang Liu, Fo-Lin Liu, Bo Jiang, Rui-Quan Xu, Kun-Lin Xie

Department of Urology, First Affiliated Hospital of Gannan Medical University, Ganzhou 341000, People’s Republic of China.

Correspondence: Dr. XF Zou (gyfyurology@126.com)

Date of Submission 28-Feb-2015 Date of Decision 04-Jun-2015 Date of Acceptance 15-Oct-2015 Date of Web Publication 29-Dec-2015

Abstract

We have established a novel method named transumbilical two‑port laparoscopic varicocele ligation (TTLVL) for varicocele, which
is still needed to evaluate. In this study, 90 patients with left idiopathic symptomatic varicoceles of grades II–III according to the
Dubin grading system were randomly assigned to TTLVL (n = 45) and conventional laparoscopic varicocele ligation (CLVL) (n = 45).
The demographic, intraoperative, postoperative, and follow‑up data were recorded and compared between the two groups. All the
procedures in the two groups were completed successfully with no intraoperative complications and no conversions to open surgery.
No significant difference was found in the operative time, resuming ambulation, bowel recovery, postoperative hospital stay, and
postoperative resolution of scrotal pain between the two groups (P > 0.05). However, the postoperative mean visual analog pain
scale scores for TTLVL group were all less at 24 h, 48 h, 72 h, and 7 days postoperatively compared to CLVL (P = 0.001, 0.010,
0.006, and 0.027, respectively). The mean patient scar assessment questionnaire score in postoperative month 3 was 29.7 for
TTLVL group compared with 32.1 for CLVL group (P < 0.001). There was no testicular atrophy observed in both groups during the
follow‑up period. The study shows that TTLVL is a safe, feasible, and effective minimally invasive surgical alternative to CLVL for
the treatment of varicocele. Compared with CLVL, TTLVL may decrease postoperative pain and improve the cosmetic outcomes.

Full Text | PDF |

 
Browse:  368
 
Copyright 1999-2017  Shanghai Materia Medica, Shanghai Jiao Tong University.  All rights reserved