The Effect of Microsurgery Inguinal Varicocelectomy by Secondary Infertile Male Patients with Clinical Varicocele

Year 2014, Volume: 19 Issue: 1, 43 - 45, 29.07.2014

Namık Badur Ahmet Karakeçi

Abstract

Objective: To investigate effect of Microsurgery Inguinal Varicocelectomy by treating varicocele in secondary infertile patients. Material and Method: Sixty primary infertile and thirty secondary infertile patients whom were referred to andrology clinic due to infertility and undergone Microsurgery Inguinal Varicocelectomy operation because of varicocele presence, were retrospectively investigated. Patients were asses-sed according to age, duration of the infertility history, grade of varicocele, pre and postoperative semen parameters and pregnancy rates. Results: No any significant difference were determined in the pre and postoperative semen parameters in two groups (p>0,05). It was detected that sperm motility and number of total motile sperms with primary infertile group and number of spermia, motile spermia and sperm motility by secon-dary infertile group have statistically significantly increased after surgical procedure (p

Keywords

Varicocele, Secondary infertility, Microsurgery inguinal varicocelectomy.

Klinik Varikoseli Olan Sekonder İnfertil Erkek Hastalarda Mikrocerrahi İnguinal Varikoselektominin Etkinliği

Abstract

Amaç: Varikosel tedavisinde uygulanan Mikrocerrahi İnguinal Varikoselektomi'nin sekonder infertil hastalardaki etkinliğini araştırmak. Gereç ve Yöntem: Androloji polikliniğine infertilite nedeni ile başvuran ve klinik varikosel tanısıyla Mikrocerrahi İnguinal Varikoselektomi operas-yonu yapılan 60 primer infertil ve 30 sekonder infertil hasta retrospektif olarak incelendi. Hastaların yaşları, infertilite süreleri, varikosel dereceleri (grade), operasyon öncesi ve operasyon sonrası semen parametreleri ve gebelik oranları değerlendirildi. Bulgular: Operasyon öncesinde ve operasyon sonrasında semen parametreleri açısından her iki grup arasında anlamlı fark olmadığı saptandı (p>0,05). Primer infertilite grubunda operasyon sonrası, operasyon öncesine göre sperm motilitesinin ve total motil sperm sayısının, sekonder infertil grupta ise sperm sayısının, sperm motilitesinin ve total motil sperm sayısının anlamlı olarak daha yüksek olduğu tespit edildi (p

Keywords

Varikosel, Sekonder infertilite, Mikrocerrahi inguinal varikoselektomi.

References

• Saypol DC. Varicocele. J Androl 1981; 2: 61-5.
• Stewart BH, Montie JE. Male infertility: an optimistic report. J Urol 1973; 110: 216-18.
• Dubin L, Amelar RD. Varicocelectomy: 986 cases in a twelveyear study. Urology 1977; 10: 446-9.
• Hendry WF, Sommerville IF, Hall RR, Pugh RC. Investigation and treatment of the subfertile male. Br J Urol 1973; 45: 6849
• Cockett AT, Urry RL, Dougherty KA. The varicocele and semen characteristics. J Urol 1979; 121: 435-36.
• Zorgniotti AW, Sealfon AI. Scrotal hypotermia: new treatment for poor semen. Urology 1984; 23: 439-41.
• Palamo A. A radical cure of varicocele by a new technique. J Urol 1949; 6: 604-6.
• Ivanissevich O. Left varicocele due to reflux, experience with 4470 operative cases in forty-two years. J Int Coll Surg 1960; 34: 742-55.
• Enquist E, Stein BS, Sigman M. Laparoscopic versus subinguinal varicocelectomy: a comparative study. Fertil Steril 1994; 61: 1092-6.
• Lima SS, Castro MP, Costa OF. A new method for the treatment of varicocele. Andrologia 1978; 10: 103-6.
• Marmar JL, Kim Y. Subinguinal microsurgical varicocelectomy: a technical critique and statistical analysis of semen and pregnancy data. J Urol 1994; 152: 1127-32.
• Moshcr WD, Pratt WF. Fecundity and infertility in the United States: Incidence and trends. Fertil Steril 1991; 56: 192-3.
• Nagler HM, Luntz RK, Martinis FG. Varicocele; Infertility in the Male. St. Louis: Mosby- Year Book, 1997: 336-59.
• Goldstein M, Gilbert BR, Dicker AP, Dwosh J, Gnecco C. Microsurgical inguinal varicocelectomy with delivery of the testis: an artery and lymphatic sparing technique. J Urol 1992; 148: 1808-11.
• Schlegel PN, Goldstein M. Anatomical approach to varicocelectomy. Semin Urol 1992; 10: 242.
• Cayan S, Shavakhabov S, Kadioğlu A. Treatment of palpable varicocele in infertile men: a meta-analysis to define the best technique. J Androl 2008; 30: 33-40.
• Al-Kandari AM, Shabaan H, Ibrahim HM, Elshebiny YH. Comparison of outcomes of different varicocelectomy techniques: Open inguinal laporoscopic, and inguinal microscopic varicocelectomy. J Urol 2007; 69: 417-20.
• Al-Said S, Al-Naimi M, Al-Ansari A, Younis N. Varicocelectomy for male infertility: a comparative study of open, laporoscopic and microsurgical approaches. J Urol 2008; 180: 26670.
• Walsh TJ, Wu AK, Croughan MS, Turek PJ. Differences in the clinical characteristics of primarily and secondarily infertile men with varicocele. Fertil Steril 2009; 91; 826-30.