切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版) ›› 2021, Vol. 15 ›› Issue (01) : 47 -50. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-3253.2021.01.012

所属专题: 文献

临床研究

经腹股沟和经腹股沟下途径显微镜精索静脉结扎术的疗效对比
黄剑华1, 钟羽翔1, 赵朋朋1, 麦源1, 韦巍1, 林富祥1, 金敬苗1, 徐战平1,()   
  1. 1. 528000 广东,佛山市中医院泌尿外科
  • 收稿日期:2020-06-29 出版日期:2021-02-01
  • 通信作者: 徐战平

Comparison of efficacy between inguinal and subinguinal microscopic varicocelectomy

Jianhua Huang1, Yuxiang Zhong1, Pengpeng Zhao1, Yuan Mai1, Wei Wei1, Fuxiang Lin1, Jingmiao Jin1, Zhanping Xu1,()   

  1. 1. Department of Urology, Foshan Hospital of TCM, Guangdong 528000, China
  • Received:2020-06-29 Published:2021-02-01
  • Corresponding author: Zhanping Xu
引用本文:

黄剑华, 钟羽翔, 赵朋朋, 麦源, 韦巍, 林富祥, 金敬苗, 徐战平. 经腹股沟和经腹股沟下途径显微镜精索静脉结扎术的疗效对比[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2021, 15(01): 47-50.

Jianhua Huang, Yuxiang Zhong, Pengpeng Zhao, Yuan Mai, Wei Wei, Fuxiang Lin, Jingmiao Jin, Zhanping Xu. Comparison of efficacy between inguinal and subinguinal microscopic varicocelectomy[J]. Chinese Journal of Endourology(Electronic Edition), 2021, 15(01): 47-50.

目的

比较经腹股沟和经腹股沟下途径显微镜精索静脉结扎术治疗精索静脉曲张的安全性和疗效。

方法

回顾性分析我院2016年1月至2019年6月显微镜精索静脉结扎术治疗精索静脉曲张145例资料,经腹股沟途径53例,经腹股沟下途径92例。比较两组手术时间、结扎精索静脉数量、阴囊疼痛缓解率、精子质量改善情况及并发症(睾丸鞘膜积液、睾丸萎缩、复发)。

结果

经腹股沟途径手术比经腹股沟下途径手术时间短[(34.2±5.0)min vs(37.8±8.4)min,t=-3.245,P=0.001],且结扎精索内静脉数量少[(6.1±1.3)根vs(8.3±1.5)根,t=-9.171,P<0.001]。两组术后精子质量改善情况、阴囊疼痛缓解率及并发症发生率差异无统计学意义。

结论

显微镜下经腹股沟和经腹股沟下途径精索静脉结扎术治疗精索静脉曲张均疗效确切而且安全。经腹股沟途径需结扎的精索内静脉少,手术时间短。

Objective

To compare the efficacy and safety between microscopic inguinal and subinguinal varicocelectomy for varicocele.

Methods

The data of 145 cases underwent microscopic varicocelectomy in our hospital from January 2016 to June 2019 were analyzed retrospectively. Microscopic inguinal varicocelectomy (MIV) and microscopic subinguinal varicocelectomy (MSV) were performed in 53 and 92 patients. Operation duration, number of ligated veins, postoperation scrotum pain relief rate, and changes of sperm parameters were compared between the two groups. Complications, such as hydrocele, testicular atrophy, and recurrence of varicocele, were compared between the two groups.

Results

Operation duration was significantly shorter in the MIV group than in the MSV group [(34.2±5.0)min vs (37.8±8.4)min, t=-3.245, P=0.001]. And the number of ligated veins was significantly fewer in the MIV group [(6.1±1.3) veins vs (8.3±1.5) veins, t=-9.171, P<0.001]. No statistically significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of changes of sperm parameters, postoperation scrotum pain relief rate, and complications.

Conclusion

Microscopic inguinal and subinguinal varicocelectomy are both safe and effective in treatment of varicocele. Subinguinal approach need fewer veins ligated and shorter operation duration.

表1 两种途径显微镜精索静脉结扎术一般资料比较
表2 两种途径显微镜精索静脉结扎术术中情况及手术并发症情况比较
表3 两种途径显微镜精索静脉结扎术精子质量改善情况比较
[6]
Cayan S, Shavakhabov S, Kadioglu A. Treatment of palpable varicocele in infertile men: a meta-analysis to define the best technique[J]. J Androl, 2009, 30(1):33-40.
[7]
黄泽海, 梁燊, 王子明, 等. 3种手术方式治疗成人精索静脉曲张疗效比较[J]. 实用医学杂志, 2018, 34(23): 3929-3932.
[8]
《精索静脉曲张诊断与治疗中国专家共识》编写组. 精索静脉曲张诊断与治疗中国专家共识 [J]. 中华男科学杂志, 2015, 21(11): 1035-1042.
[9]
俞能旺, 沈戈桢, 宋华, 等. 治疗精索静脉曲张不同术式疗效的荟萃分析[J]. 中华泌尿外科杂志, 2013, 34(1): 45-49.
[10]
聂欢, 高强利, 陈磊, 等. 三种精索静脉曲张手术疗效的对比观察[J]. 中国性科学, 2017, 26(3): 24-27.
[11]
Pettersson S, Söderholm B, Persson JE, et al. Testicular blood flow in man measured with venous occlusion plethysmography and xenon133 [J]. Scand J Urol Nephrol, 1973, 7(2): 115-119.
[12]
Saban OD, Fatih O, Ahmet EC, et al. A comparison between the efficacy and safety of microscopic inguinal and subinguinal varicocelectomy [J]. Turk J Urol, 2019, 45(4): 254-260.
[13]
苏剑锋, 张炎, 杨晓健, 等. 显微镜下两种入路治疗精索静脉曲张引起的阴囊疼痛疗效对比 [J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2017, 11(1): 55-58.
[14]
Lv KL, Zhuang JT, Zhao L, et al. Varicocele anatomy during subinguinal microsurgical varicocelectomy in Chinese men [J]. Andrologia, 2015, 47(10): 1190-1195.
[15]
Hopps CV, Lemer ML, Schlegel PN, et al. Intraoperative varicocele anatomy: a microscopic study of the inguinal versus subinguinal approach [J]. J Urol, 2003, 170 (6 Pt 1): 2366-2370.
[1]
Palomo A. Radical cure of varicocele by a new technique; preliminary report [J]. J Urol, 1949, 61(3): 604-607.
[2]
Glassberg KI, Poon SA, Gjertson CK, et al. Laparoscopic lymphatic sparing varicocelectomy in adolescents [J]. J Urol, 2008, 180(1): 326-331.
[3]
Nabi G, Asterlings S, Greene DR, et al. Percutaneous embolization of varicoceles: outcomes and correlation of semen improvement with pregnancy [J]. Urology, 2004, 63(2): 359-363.
[4]
Watanabe M, Nagai A, Kusumi N, et al. Minimal invasiveness and effectivity of subinguinal microscopic varicocelectomy: a comparative study with retroperitoneal high and laparoscopic approaches[J]. Int J Urol, 2005, 12(10): 892-898.
[5]
Cayan S, Kadioglu TC, Tefekli A, et al. Comparison of results and complications of high ligation surgery and microsurgical high inguinal varicocelectomy in the treatment of varicocele [J]. Urology, 2000, 55(5): 750-754.
[1] 王新团, 李博, 李栋, 马宁, 李宝平, 刘淑萍. Laennec膜入路与Glisson鞘入路在腹腔镜解剖性肝切除中的对比研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 418-422.
[2] 陈大六, 宋勇罡, 赵海剑, 张晓雨. 三种不同手术入路的腔镜甲状腺癌根治术临床效果评价[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(02): 188-191.
[3] 张乙川, 李劲, 徐杰, 齐锐, 王何斌. 前方入路与标准入路胰十二指肠切除术治疗胰头癌的对比研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(04): 370-373.
[4] 陈伟, 邱钧, 李志贵, 朱锋, 唐国华, 李添亮. 胸锁乳突肌肌间入路对桥本病合并甲状腺乳头状癌临床运用分析[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(04): 447-450.
[5] 陈纲, 吕远, 李世拥. 腹腔镜胃癌根治术需关注的几个问题[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(03): 251-254.
[6] 王锋锋, 李虎, 苏孟媛, 苏嘉明, 何祖强, 钟自强. 包皮环切术致尿道损伤的原因分析及修补方法[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 394-396.
[7] 叶鉴锋, 王润邦, 张墨. 3D高清腹腔镜保留睾丸动脉的精索静脉高位结扎术的疗效分析[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(03): 265-269.
[8] 王晓利, 李琦, 李春风, 王璟琦, 管晓东. 保留睾丸动脉的腹腔镜精索内静脉高位结扎术对精索静脉曲张致不育的疗效分析[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(03): 261-264.
[9] 丁洪亮, 陈贵进, 刘序, 周祥武, 王乐霄. 单侧布孔外侧入路法在经腹腹膜前疝修补术中的应用研究[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(01): 32-36.
[10] 周陈杰, 王杰钦, 张健民, 冯磊, 傅超毅, 廖晖, 徐小平, 高毅. 浅谈腹腔镜解剖性肝切除手术入路和解剖标志[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2022, 11(03): 244-247.
[11] 王竹, 王庚启, 郑军, 端磊, 徐冰, 唐熙晨, 吴泊逸, 王秋根, 王建东, 曹雷, 毕春, 邓国英. 肘关节外侧入路治疗肱骨小头骨折的治疗体会及经验总结[J]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2023, 11(03): 235-241.
[12] 郭协力, 戴伟川, 蔡文华, 方仲宁, 陈英贤, 齐震. 经颈前入路显微镜下椎间盘切除及椎体间植骨融合术[J]. 中华神经创伤外科电子杂志, 2022, 08(06): 379-383.
[13] 孙广卫, 胡昌龙, 邱涛. 不同手术入路下神经内镜治疗老年垂体瘤的效果评估[J]. 中华脑科疾病与康复杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(03): 169-174.
[14] 成刚, 陈旭, 岳勇. 听神经瘤枕下乙状窦后入路显微切除术后面神经功能损伤的危险因素分析[J]. 中华脑科疾病与康复杂志(电子版), 2022, 12(03): 137-141.
[15] 马洪庆, 于淼, 张建锋, 武雪亮, 胡旭华, 王光林, 孟泽松, 于滨, 王贵英. 混合入路与传统中央入路在腹腔镜直肠癌根治术中的疗效分析[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 545-550.
阅读次数
全文


摘要