Two decades of experience with laparoscopic varicocele repair in children: Standardizing the technique. Issue 1 (February 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Esposito, Ciro; Escolino, Maria; Castagnetti, Marco; Cerulo, Mariapina; Settimi, Alessandro; Cortese, Giuseppe; Turrà, Francesco; Iannazzone, Marta; Izzo, Serena; Servillo, Giuseppe
• Is Part Of: Journal of pediatric urology. Volume 14:Issue 1(2018)
• Page Start: 10.e1
• Page End: 10.e7
• Publication Date: 2018-02
• Subjects: Varicocele -- Children -- Laparoscopy -- Isosulfan blue -- Hydrocele; Pediatric urology -- Periodicals; Urologic Diseases -- Periodicals; Urogenital Diseases -- Periodicals; Urologic Surgical Procedures -- Periodicals; Child; Infant; Urologie pédiatrique -- Périodiques; Appareil urinaire -- Maladies -- Périodiques; Pédiatrie; Urologie; Pediatric urology; Périodique électronique (Descripteur de forme); Ressource Internet (Descripteur de forme); Electronic journals; Periodicals; Electronic journals; 618.926
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2017.06.017
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1477-5131

Abstract

Summary: Background: Controversy still exists about the indications and the gold standard approach for varicocele treatment in pediatric population. Objective: The authors report their 23 years of experience in laparoscopic varicocele repair in the pediatric population. Study design: We retrospectively evaluated the data of 345 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic left varicocelectomy from January 1993 to December 2015. Average patient age was 12.5 years (range 8–17). Seven out of 345 patients (2%) had a recurrent varicocele, and five out of 345 patients (1.4%) had a varicocele on a single testis. In 335/345 patients (97.1%) we performed a Palomo procedure, and in 10/345 patients (2.9%) an artery-sparing Palomo procedure. After 2010, in 105/345 patients (30.4%) we performed a lymphatic sparing procedure using isosulfan blue injection preoperatively. Results: All procedures were completed in laparoscopy (Figure ), without conversions or intraoperative complications. The average operative time was 17 min (range 14–45) for the Palomo procedure and 26 min (range 18–50) for artery-sparing Palomo. In 45/345 patients (13%) we performed additional procedures. We recorded 4/345 (1.3%) recurrences/persistences in patients undergoing Palomo, while we recorded 1/10 (10%) recurrence/persistence after artery-sparing Palomo. On 230 Palomo procedures performed in the pre-isosulfan blue era, we recorded 25 cases of hydrocele (10.8%), 13 of these were treated with transcrotal puncture and 12 required surgical operation. The last 105 patients undergoing isosulfan blue injection had no postoperative hydrocele. We also reported 10 other complications (I grade Clavien-Dindo) such as umbilical granuloma or instrumental problems. Discussion: Analyzing the international literature of the last 25 years, most papers focused on the minimally invasive treatment of pediatric varicocele. There are several reasons to perform laparoscopic repair of pediatric varicocele. First of all, it is technically easy to perform, the average operative time is very short, and it has excellent outcome in regard to varicocele persistence/recurrence. In addition it has a very low complication rate, and in particular adopting the intradartoic/intratesticular isosulfan blue injection before surgery we recorded no postoperative hydrocele. Conclusion: On the basis of our 23 years of experience with varicocele repair, we clearly believe that laparoscopic Palomo lymphatic sparing varicocelectomy should be considered the standard of care for the treatment of pediatric patients with varicocele. Laparoscopic varicocelectomy is technically easy and quick to perform, painless, and scarless, with a recurrence rate of about 1%. The use of a preoperative injection of isosulfan blue completely eliminates postoperative hydrocele formation. Figure Palomo procedure: bundle is clipped and sectioned and the blue-colored lymphatics are spared.