English Polski
Vol 24, No 1-2 (2022)
Review paper
Published online: 2023-05-10

open access

Page views 878
Article views/downloads 2140
Get Citation

Connect on Social Media

Connect on Social Media

Żylaki powrózka nasiennego — obecne trendy leczenia

Krzysztof Kowalik1, Paweł Narożnicki2, Andrzej Modrzejewski1
Chirurgia Polska 2022;24(1-2):16-21.

Abstract

Żylaki powrózka nasiennego są częstą przyczyną bólów w obrębie moszny w grupie młodych mężczyzn. Żylaki moszny mogą pogarszać jakość nasienia, powodując przemijającą bezpłodność. Wskazaniem do leczenia operacyjnego są dolegliwości bólowe jądra lub trudność z poczęciem potomstwa. W artykule omówiono metody operacji, przedstawiono wady i zalety najczęściej stosowanych typów zabiegów.

Article available in PDF format

View PDF (Polish) Download PDF file

References

  1. Salonia A, Bettocchi C, Carvalho J, Corona G. Jones TH, Kadioglu A, Martinez-Salamanca JI, Minhas S, Serefoglu EC, Verze P: Wytyczne EAU dotyczące zdrowia seksualnego i reprodukcyjnego. Europejskie Stowarzyszenie Urologiczne 2021. https://uroweb.org/wp-content/uploads/EAU-Guidelines-on-Sexual-and-Reproductive-Health-2021.pdf.
  2. Sidhu P, Brijakcic B, Derchi L: EFSUMB – podręcznik europejski. USG moszny. 2011. https://issuu.com/efsumb/ docs/podręcznik-moszny_ch13?e=3336122/660397.
  3. Radmayr C, Bogaert G, Dogan HS, Nijman JM, Rawashdeh YFH, Silay MS, Stein R, Tekgül S: Wytyczne EAU dotyczące urologii dziecięcej. Europejskie Towarzystwo Urologiczne 2021. https://uroweb.org/wp-content/uploads/EAU-Guidelines-on-Paediatric Urology-2021.pdf.
  4. Freeman S, Bertolotto M, Richenberg J, Belfield J, Dogra V, Huang DY, Lotti F, Markiet K, Nikolic O, Ramanathan S, Ramchandani P, Rocher L, Secil M, Sidhu PS, Skrobisz K, Studniarek M, Tsili A, Tuncay Turgut A, Pavlica P, Derchi LE, członkowie ESUR-SPIWG: Ultradźwiękowa ocena żylaków powrózka nasiennego: wytyczne i zalecenia Europejskiego Towarzystwa Radiologii Moszny Moszny i Obrazowania Prącia (ESUR-SPIWG) do wykrywania, klasyfikacji i ocenianie. Eur Radiol 2020; 30:11-25.
  5. Bertolotto, M, Freeman S, Richenberg J : Ocena ultrasonograficzna żylaków powrózka nasiennego: systematyczny przegląd literatury i uzasadnienie wytycznych i zaleceń ESUR-SPIWG. J USG. 2020; 23: 487–507.
  6. Lorenc T, Krupniewski L, Palczewski P, et al. Wartość ultrasonografii w diagnostyce żylaków powrózka nasiennego. J Ultrason. 2017; 16(67): 359–370.
  7. Sharlip ID, Jarow JP, Belker AM, et al. Best practice policies for male infertility. Fertil Steril. 2002; 77: 873–882.
  8. Sigman M, Jarow JP. Ipsilateral testicular hypotrophy is associated with decreased sperm counts in infertile men with varicoceles. J Urol. 1997; 158(2): 605–607.
  9. Akbay E, Cayan S, Doruk E, et al. Występowanie żylaków powrózka nasiennego i zaniku jąder związanego z żylakami powrózka nasiennego u dzieci i młodzieży tureckiej. BJU wewn. 2000; 86: 490–493.
  10. Baazeem A, Belzile E, Ciampi A, et al. Leczenie żylaków powrózka nasiennego i czynnika męskiego: nowa metaanaliza i przegląd roli naprawy żylaków powrózka nasiennego. Eur Urol. 2011; 60(4): 796–808.
  11. Masson P, Brannigan RE. Żylaki powrózka nasiennego. Urol Clin North Am., 2014, 41: 129 144. 9. Niedzielski J., Paduch D., Raczyński P: Assessment of adolescent varicocele. Pediatr Surg Int, 1997; 12, 5-6. : 410–413.
  12. Oster J. Żylaki powrózka nasiennego u dzieci i młodzieży. Dochodzenie w sprawie incydentu wśród duńskich dzieci w wieku szkolnym. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 1971; 5: 27–32.
  13. Paduch DA, Niedzielski J, Skoog SJ. Diagnostyka, ocena i leczenie żylaków żylaków młodzieńczych. Med Sci Monit, 1999; 5. ; 6: 1255–1267.
  14. Radmayr C, Bogaert G, Dogan HS, et al. Wytyczne EAU dotyczące urologii dziecięcej. 2018. ttp://uroweb.org/guideline/pediatric-urology/ (dane dostępu: 17.11.2019).
  15. Comhaire F, Vermeulen A. Plasma testosterone in patients with varicocele and sexual inadequacy. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1975; 40(5): 824–829.
  16. Su LM, Goldstein M, Schlegel PN. The effect of varicocelectomy on serum testosterone levels in infertile men with varicoceles. J Urol. 1995; 154(5): 1752–1755.
  17. Rizkala E, Fishman A, Gitlin J, et al. Long term outcomes of lymphatic sparing laparoscopic varicocelectomy. J Pediatr Urol. 2013; 9(4): 458–463.
  18. Yu W, Rao T, Ruan Y, et al. Laparoscopic Varicocelectomy in Adolescents: Artery Ligation and Artery Preservation. Urology. 2016; 89: 150–154.
  19. Misseri R, Gershbein AB, Horowitz M, et al. The adolescent varicocele. II: the incidence of hydrocele and delayed recurrent varicocele after varicocelectomy in a long-term follow-up. BJU Int. 2001; 87(6): 494–498.
  20. Esposito C, Valla JS, Najmaldin A, et al. Incidence and management of hydrocele following varicocele surgery in children. J Urol. 2004; 171(3): 1271–1273.
  21. Fast AM, Deibert CM, Van Batavia JP, et al. Adolescent varicocelectomy: does artery sparing influence recurrence rate and/or catch-up growth? Andrology. 2014; 2(2): 159–164.
  22. Kocvara R, Dolezal J, Hampl R, et al. Division of lymphatic vessels at varicocelectomy leads to testicular oedema and decline in testicular function according to the LH-RH analogue stimulation test. Eur Urol. 2003; 43: 430–5.
  23. Shiraishi K, Oka S, Matsuyama H. Surgical comparison of subinguinal and high inguinal microsurgical varicocelectomy for adolescent varicocele. Int J Urol. 2016; 23(4): 338–342.
  24. Kramolowsky EV, Wood NL, Donovan JF, et al. Randomized comparison of open versus laparoscopic varix ligation for the treatment of infertility. J Urol. 1997; 157: 143.
  25. Ghanem H, Anis T, El-Nashar A, et al. Subinguinal microvaricocelectomy versus retroperitoneal varicocelectomy: comparative study of complications and surgical outcome. Urology. 2004; 64(5): 1005–1009.
  26. 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. Int J Urol. 2005; 12(10): 892–898.
  27. 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. Urology. 2000; 55: 750–754.
  28. Goldstein M. Surgical management of male infertility. In: Wein AJ, editor. Campbell-Walsh Urology. 11th ed. Philadelphia: Saunders. ; 2016: 580–611.
  29. Cayan S, Shavakhabov S, Kadioglu A. Treatment of palpable varicocele in infertile men: a meta-analysis to define the best technique. J Androl. 2009; 30(1): 33–40.
  30. Shlansky-Goldberg RD, VanArsdalen KN, Rutter CM, et al. Percutaneous varicocele embolization versus surgical ligation for the treatment of infertility: changes in seminal parameters and pregnancy outcomes. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 1997; 8(5): 759–767.
  31. Nabi G, Asterlings S, Greene DR, et al. Percutaneous embolization of varicoceles: outcomes and correlation of semen improvement with pregnancy. Urology. 2004; 63(2): 359–363.
  32. Hawkins CM, Racadio JM, McKinney DN, et al. Varicocele retrograde embolization with boiling contrast medium and gelatin sponges in adolescent subjects: a clinically effective therapeutic alternative. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2012; 23(2): 206–210.
  33. Mordel N, Mor-Yosef S, Margalioth EJ, et al. Spermatic vein ligation as treatment for male infertility. Justification by postoperative semen improvement and pregnancy rates. J Reprod Med. 1990; 35(2): 123–127.
  34. Abdulmaaboud MR, Shokeir AA, Farage Y, et al. Treatment of varicocele: a comparative study of conventional open surgery, percutaneous retrograde sclerotherapy, and laparoscopy. Urology. 1998; 52(2): 294–300.
  35. Prasivoravong J, Marcelli F, Lemaître L, et al. Beneficial effects of varicocele embolization on semen parameters. Basic Clin Androl. 2014; 24: 9.
  36. Alqahtani A, Yazbeck S, Dubois J, et al. Percutaneous embolization of varicocele in children: A Canadian experience. J Pediatr Surg. 2002; 37(5): 783–785.
  37. Porst H, Bähren W, Lenz M, et al. Percutaneous sclerotherapy of varicoceles--an alternative to conventional surgical methods. Br J Urol. 1984; 56(1): 73–78.
  38. Gazzera C, Rampado O, Savio L, et al. Radiological treatment of male varicocele: technical, clinical, seminal and dosimetric aspects. Radiol Med. 2006; 111(3): 449–458.
  39. Ferguson JM, Gillespie IN, Chalmers N, et al. Percutaneous varicocele embolization in the treatment of infertility. Br J Radiol. 1995; 68(811): 700–703.
  40. Flacke S, Schuster M, Kovacs A, et al. Embolization of varicocles: pretreatment sperm motility predicts later pregnancy in partners of infertile men. Radiology. 2008; 248(2): 540–549.
  41. Granata C, Oddone M, Toma P, et al. Retrograde percutaneous sclerotherapy of left idiopathic varicocele in children: results and follow-up. Pediatr Surg Int. 2008; 24(5): 583–587.
  42. Lenz M, Hof N, Kersting-Sommerhoff B, et al. Anatomic variants of the spermatic vein: importance for percutaneous sclerotherapy of idiopathic varicocele. Radiology. 1996; 198(2): 425–431.
  43. Punekar SV, Prem AR, Ridhorkar VR, et al. Post-surgical recurrent varicocele: efficacy of internal spermatic venography and steel-coil embolization. Br J Urol. 1996; 77(1): 124–128.
  44. Sivanathan C, Abernethy LJ. Retrograde embolisation of varicocele in the paediatric age group: a review of 10 years' practice. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2003; 85(1): 50–51.
  45. Coley SC, Jackson JE. Endovascular occlusion with a new mechanical detachable coil. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1998; 171(4): 1075–1079.
  46. Ficarra V, Crestani A, Novara G, et al. Varicocele repair for infertility: what is the evidence? Curr Opin Urol. 2012; 22(6): 489–494.
  47. Abdel-Meguid TA, Al-Sayyad A, Tayib A, et al. Does varicocele repair improve male infertility? An evidence-based perspective from a randomized, controlled trial. Eur Urol. 2011; 59(3): 455–461.
  48. Mansour Ghanaie M, Asgari SA, Dadrass N, et al. Effects of varicocele repair on spontaneous first trimester miscarriage: a randomized clinical trial. Urol J. 2012; 9(2): 505–513.
  49. Krause W, Muller H, Schafer H, et al. Does treatment of varicocele improve male fertility? Andrologia. 2002; 34: 164–71.
  50. Agarwal A, Deepinder F, Cocuzza M et al. Efficacy of varicocelectomy in improving semen parameters: new meta-analytical approach. Urology. 2007; 70(3): 532–538.
  51. Nork JJ, Berger JH, Crain DS, et al. Youth varicocele and varicocele treatment: a meta-analysis of semen outcomes. Fertil Steril. 2014; 102(2): 381–387.e6.
  52. Esteves SC, Miyaoka R, Roque M, et al. Outcome of varicocele repair in men with nonobstructive azoospermia: systematic review and meta-analysis. Asian J Androl. 2016; 18(2): 246–253.
  53. Shridharani A, Lockwood G, Sandlow J. Varicocelectomy in the treatment of testicular pain: a review. Curr Opin Urol 2012;22 (6):499–506. .
  54. Elzanaty S, Johansen C. Microsurgical Subinguinal Varicocele Repair of Grade II-III Lesions Associated with Improvements of Testosterone Levels. Curr Urol. 2017; 10(1): 45–49.
  55. Hsiao W, Rosoff JS, Pale JR, et al. Varicocelectomy is associated with increases in serum testosterone independent of clinical grade. Urology. 2013; 81(6): 1213–1217.