Varicocele percutaneous embolization outcomes in a pediatric group: 7-year retrospective study
- 350 Downloads
Percutaneous embolization and surgical repair are the current treatment options for varicocele, but determining method superiority remains controversial. In this retrospective study, we evaluate the technical success, complication and recurrence rates following percutaneous embolization in a pediatric group, which were compared to reported outcomes for surgical repairs.
Thirty children treated for percutaneous varicocele embolization were recruited. The side and grade of varicocele, symptoms, testicular asymmetry, mean recurrence time, total radiation dose and complications were evaluated. Recurrence and follow-up complications due to embolization were also reviewed.
The venography showed retrograde filling of the internal spermatic vein with the identification of aberrantly fed vessels in 23 % of patients. None of the patients suffered from procedure complications except one who had venous injury which was treated with a sclerosing agent. The technical success rate was 93 % (28 patients) with a recurrence rate of 13 % (4 patients). Interestingly, the mean radiation dose used was 862.5 µGy m2, 3 times lower than abdominal CT.
Considering the intravascular nature of embolization, which aims to avoid testicular artery and spermatic cord damage (difficult to avoid with the surgical method), and consequently a lower complication rate, along with the same success rate and recurrence rate, our study supports that embolization is a superior method to surgical interventions.
KeywordsVaricocele Percutaneous embolization Venography Varicocelectomy Pampiniform venous plexus
Compliance with ethical standards
This study was approved by the local ethical committee of the Sion Hospital, Sion, Switzerland, and is in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration.
Conflict of interest
The authors certify that they have no conflict of interest and are not affiliated or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.
- 12.Tapiovaara M, Siiskonen T (2008) Pcxmc 2.0Google Scholar
- 21.Esposito C, Monguzzi G, Gonzalez-Sabin MA, Rubino R, Montinaro L, Papparella A, Esposito G, Settimi A, Mastroianni L, Zamparelli M, Sacco R, Amici G, Damiano R, Innaro N (2001) Results and complications of laparoscopic surgery for pediatric varicocele. J Pediatr Surg 36:767–769CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 27.Cassidy D, Jarvi K, Grober E, Lo K. Varicocele surgery or embolization: which is better? Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l’Association des urologues du Canada. 2012;6:266-268Google Scholar
- 28.Li X, Samei E, Segars WP, Sturgeon GM, Colsher JG, Toncheva G, Yoshizumi TT, Frush DP (2011) Patient-specific radiation dose and cancer risk estimation in ct: part ii. Appl Patients Med Phys 38:408–419Google Scholar