A cost outcome study of varicocoele embolisation and future pregnancy in an Australian public hospital setting.

INTRODUCTION: Varicocoele is commonly encountered in males with infertility. Studies have shown that varicocoele repair (surgery or embolisation) can improve the rate of subsequent pregnancy. In Australia, there have been no studies assessing the cost of varicocoele embolisation and current practice is based on international data. This study aimed to assess the cost of varicocoele embolisation and estimate the treatment cost per pregnancy. METHODS: Retrospective cost-outcome study of patients treated by embolisation between January 2018 and 2023. A bottom-up approach was used to calculate procedure costs whereas a top-down approach was used to calculate costs for all other patient services, including direct and indirect costs. To calculate cost per pregnancy, costs were adjusted according to existing published data on the rate of pregnancy after embolisation. RESULTS: Costing data from 18 patients were included, of median age 33.5 years (range 26-60) and median varicocoele grade 2.5 (range 1-3). All patients had unilateral treatment, most commonly via right internal jugular (16 patients, 89%) and using a 0.035″ system (17 patients, 94%). The median cost for the entire treatment including procedural, non-procedural, ward and peri-procedural costs was AUD$2208.10 (USD$1405 or EUR€1314), range AUD$1691-7051. The projected cost to the healthcare system per pregnancy was AUD$5387 (USD$3429 or EUR€3207). CONCLUSION: Total varicocoele embolisation cost and the cost per-pregnancy were lower than for both embolisation and surgical repair in existing international studies. Patients undergoing varicocoele treatment should have the option to access an interventional radiologist to realise the benefits of this low-cost pinhole procedure.

Testicular catch-up growth in the non-operative management of the adolescent varicocele.

INTRODUCTION: Adolescent varicocele is a common urologic condition with a spectrum of outcomes, leading to variations in management. Testicular hypotrophy is a common indication for surgery Routine monitoring may be an appropriate form of management for many adolescents with testicular hypotrophy, as studies have shown that a large proportion of these patients may experience catch-up growth of the ipsilateral testis. Furthermore, there are few longitudinal studies which have correlated patient specific factors to catch-up growth. We aimed to determine the frequency of testicular catch up-growth in adolescents with varicocele while also examining if patient specific factors such as BMI, BMI percentile, or height correlated with testicular catch-up growth. METHODS: A retrospective chart review found adolescent patients who presented to our institution with varicocele from 1997 to 2019. Patients between the ages of 9 and 20 years with left-sided varicocele, a clinically significant testicular size discrepancy, and at least two scrotal ultrasounds at least one year apart were included in analysis. Testicular size discrepancy of greater than 15% on scrotal ultrasound was considered clinically significant. Testicular size was estimated in volume (mL) via the Lambert formula. Statistical relationships between testicular volume differential and height, body mass index (BMI), and age were described with Spearman correlation coefficients (ρ). RESULTS: 40 patients had a testicular volume differential of greater than 15% at some point during their clinical course and were managed non-operatively with observation and serial testicular ultrasounds. On follow-up ultrasound, 32/40 (80%) had a testicular volume differential of less than 15%, with a mean age of catch up growth at 15 years (SD 1.6, range 11-18 years). There were no significant correlations between baseline testicular volume differential and baseline BMI (ρ = 0.00, 95% CI [-0.32, 0.32]), baseline BMI percentile (ρ = 0.03, 95% CI [-0.30, 0.34]), or change in height over time (ρ = 0.05, 95% CI [-0.36, 0.44]). DISCUSSION: The majority of adolescents with varicocele and testicular hypotrophy exhibited catch-up growth with observation, suggesting that surveillance is an appropriate form of management in many adolescents. These findings are consistent with previous studies and further indicate the importance of observation for the adolescent varicocele. Further research is warranted to determine patient specific factors that correlate with testicular volume differential and catch up growth in the adolescent varicocele.

AEC and AFMSC Transplantation Preserves Fertility of Experimentally Induced Rat Varicocele by Expressing Differential Regenerative Mechanisms.

Amniotic membrane and amniotic fluid derived cells are regarded as a promising stem cell source for developing regenerative medicine techniques, although they have never been tested on male infertility diseases such as varicocele (VAR). The current study aimed to examine the effects of two distinct cell sources, human Amniotic Fluid Mesenchymal Stromal Cells (hAFMSCs) and amniotic epithelial cells (hAECs), on male fertility outcomes in a rat induced VAR model. To explain cell-dependent enhancement of reproductive outcomes in rats transplanted with hAECs and hAFMSCs, insights on testis morphology, endocannabinoid system (ECS) expression and inflammatory tissue response have been carried out alongside cell homing assessment. Both cell types survived 120 days post-transplantation by modulating the ECS main components, promoting proregenerative M2 macrophages (Mφ) recruitment and a favorable anti-inflammatory IL10 expression pattern. Of note, hAECs resulted to be more effective in restoring rat fertility rate by enhancing both structural and immunoresponse mechanisms. Moreover, immunofluorescence analysis revealed that hAECs contributed to CYP11A1 expression after transplantation, whereas hAFMSCs moved towards the expression of Sertoli cell marker, SOX9, confirming a different contribution into the mechanisms leading to testis homeostasis. These findings highlight, for the first time, a distinct role of amniotic membrane and amniotic fluid derived cells in male reproduction, thus proposing innovative targeted stem-based regenerative medicine protocols for remedying high-prevalence male infertility conditions such as VAR.

Retrograde sclerotherapy of male varicocele with veno-venous shunts - incidence and management: a single-centre experience.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of our study is to compare the incidence of veno-venous shunts in male varicocele and evaluate the possibility to exclude them with manual compression or/and scrotal ligation in order to carry out the procedure of retrograde sclero-embolization. METHODS: In our retrospective study, all patients undergone retrograde sclerotherapy for varicocele in our Interventional Radiology Unit in the last four years were evaluated. Collaterals toward other venous shunts were identified and how many and which patients would be able to complete the procedure safely were considered. RESULTS: Of the 91 patients, as many as 22 (i.e., 24.17%) patients presented anatomical variants, consisting on shunting into left iliac vein (9 [9.89%]), lumbar left veins (3 [3.29%]), right iliac vein (1 [1.09%]), both iliac veins (1 [1.09%]), left femoral vein (1 [1.09%]) or a more proximal portion of the ISV itself without shunting (3 [3.29%]). Patients with duplication could benefit from a more distal injection in order to prevent back-flow; of the 19 left, nine successfully underwent sclerotherapy with manual compression or/and scrotal ligation, whereas in 10 flow through the collaterals could not be interrupted and patients were demanded for surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Many patients with abnormal communications between the internal spermatic vein and the iliac veins (that is, shunts towards the iliac veins) may as well undergo retrograde sclerotherapy safely if compression/ligation is applied. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: No large previous study highlighted the impact of veno-venous shunts in technical feasibility of retrograde sclerotherapy of varicocele.

Postvaricocele Embolization Pain Syndrome: A Case Series Report and Review of Current Treatment Strategies.

BACKGROUND: Orchialgia is not an uncommon complaint among men with varicocele, but postvaricocele embolization-related testicular pain has not been widely investigated. This study evaluates the phenomenon of postvaricocele embolization pain (PVEP) syndrome and examines the current strategies to treat this unusual complication. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A prospectively collected database of patients with PVEP who presented to a tertiary center was analyzed between January 2011 and January 2020 following internal ethics approval. Patient demographics, including other complications related to embolization, analgesic requirements, and pain scores (on a 10-point visual analog score), treatment strategies, Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) score and overall satisfaction score (on a 5-point scale), were reviewed. All patients were reviewed for a minimum of 12 months. RESULTS: A total of 20 men with a mean age of 33.8 (18-45) years old, presented with PVEP over 10 years. Most men received embolization on an average of 26.6 (18-48) months. The reasons for varicocele embolization include either isolated or combined orchialgia (15 men), subfertility (5 men), and cosmesis (6 men). Eighteen (90%) men underwent microscopic spermatic cord denervation (MSCD) and 2 patients elected for conservative measures. The average pain scores pre-MSCD and post-MSCD were 6.9 (4-9) and 1.4 (0-4) (p<0.001) with a significant reduction in analgesia requirements. Immediate improvement in pain score was reported in all the patients and this persisted at the 12 months review. Most men reported a high satisfaction score (of 4/5) and only one patient reported no change in symptoms after MSCD. CONCLUSION: PVEP is a unique complication and patients should be counseled on the potential risk of persistent orchialgia following embolization for varicocele. The MSCD appears to be an effective treatment option with high success and satisfaction rates.

CIRSE Standards of Practice on Varicocele Embolisation.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous embolisation is an effective, minimally invasive means of treating a variety of benign and malignant lesions and has been successfully used to treat varicoceles since the late 1970s, with refined and expanded techniques and tools currently offering excellent outcomes for varicocele embolisation. PURPOSE: This document will presume that the indication for treatment is clear and approved by the multidisciplinary team (MDT) and will define the standards required for the performance of each modality, as well as their advantages and limitations. CIRSE Standards of Practice documents are not intended to impose a standard of clinical patient care, but recommend a reasonable approach to, and best practices for, the performance of percutaneous varicocele embolisation. METHODS: The writing group was established by the CIRSE Standards of Practice Committee and consisted of five clinicians with internationally recognised expertise in embolisation of male varicoceles. The writing group reviewed the existing literature on varicocele embolisation, performing a pragmatic evidence search using PubMed to search for publications in English and relating to human subjects published from 2006 to 2021. The final recommendations were formulated through consensus. CONCLUSION: Embolisation has an established role in the successful management of male varicoceles. This Standards of Practice document provides up-to-date recommendations for the safe performance of varicocele embolisation.

[The application of acupuncture in varicocele infertility based on " Visceral Collateral " theory].

The occurrence of varicocele infertility can be attributed to the small and flexural spermatic plexus which constitutes the main structure of spermatic cord.Obstruction of blood circulation, stagnation of qi and blood, ultimately leading to infertility. The spermatic plexus ' physiological and pathological symptoms are consistent with the theory of visceral collateral. Based on the theory of visceral collaterals, the varicocele infertility caused by stagnation of liver collateral and deficiency of kidney collateral. And the acupuncture is used to directly act on the relevant points on the meridians, so as to dredge the meridians, strengthen the healthy and expel the evil, and harmonize the yin and yang of visceral, which is more in line with the therapeutic principle of " unblocking the meridians " for collateral diseases. For varicocele infertility caused by liver meridian stasis, it can regulate the liver meridian Chong Ren, eliminate blood stasis and promote stagnation, and be combined with LR3, LI4, GB34, SP6, CV3. For varicocele infertility caused by kidney deficiency and meridian syndrome, it can tonify the kidney meridian Du Yang, warm and disperse the essence, and mainly focus on GV4, CV4, KI3, BL23 and BL43.

Safety and efficacy of acupuncture for varicocele-induced male infertility: a systematic review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Varicocele (VC) is a common clinical disease in andrology. Among a number of ways for VC treatment, surgery is the most common one, but the measurable benefit of surgical repair was slight. A growing exploration of complementary therapies has been conducted in clinical research on acupuncture for VC, but there is no relevant systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of acupuncture for VC. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: All relevant publications published from database inception through August 2022 will be searched in three English-language databases (Embase, CENTRAL, MEDLINE) and four Chinese-language databases (China National Knowledge Infrastructure, China Science and Technology Journal Database, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database and Wanfang Data). Randomised controlled trials in English and Chinese concerned with acupuncture for patients with VC will be included. The input clinical data will be processed by the Review Manager software (RevMan). The literature will be appraised with the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system (GRADE system) will be used to evaluate the quality of evidence. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study is a secondary study based on clinical studies so it does not relate to any individual patient information or infringe the rights of participants. Hence no ethical approval is required. The results will be reported in peer-reviewed journals or disseminated at relevant conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022316005.

The efficacy and mechanism of acupuncture in the treatment of male infertility: A literature review.

Fertility, a social, cultural, and medical issue, has aroused public attention because of its potential to predict future health. In recent years, the incidence of male infertility has increased significantly, and various risk factors, such as congenital factors, acquired factors, and idiopathic factors, have led to this situation. Male infertility causes substantial psychological and social distress in patients. With the implementation of the two-child policy, male infertility has brought enormous psychological and social pressure and huge economic burden to patients and the healthcare system. This has attracted the attention of not only men of childbearing age but also many male experts. The conventional therapeutic approaches for treating male infertility, including drugs, varicocele surgery, intrauterine insemination, in vitro fertilization, and intracytoplasmic sperm injection, can restore fertility to a certain extent, but their efficacy is far from satisfactory, not to mention some adverse events. Therefore, acupuncture has been chosen by many men to treat their infertility and produced significant effects. In the present paper, the efficacy and mechanism of acupuncture in the treatment of male infertility were analyzed from different perspectives such as regulating hormone secretion, reducing inflammation, and improving semen parameters. The existing literature shows that acupuncture can effectively treat male infertility.

Revisiting the impact of varicocele and its treatments on male fertility.

Varicocele is one of the most common, yet treatable, causes of male infertility. Varicoceles are present in more than 40% of infertile men with primary infertility, a figure that increases with age. Varicoceles impair semen parameters and sperm DNA and are linked with lower pregnancy and live birth rates. Until recently, men had seldom been examined in male fertility workups. This is changing as urologists have become recognized as team members in infertility. Hence identification and treatment are available as never before. Furthermore, as men become aware that they are as likely as their female partners to be infertile, they want equal 'couple care', requesting urological referrals as they realize that they can improve their semen quality and chances of fatherhood without or before fertility treatment. There is now a greater understanding of the mechanisms of varicocele-induced damage by oxidative stress, using sperm DNA as a sensitive biomarker of sperm quality. There is a current consensus that varicocele is linked to poor semen and repair improves semen and sperm DNA quality. Evidence is strengthening to indicate that varicocele repair increases pregnancy and live birth rates in natural conception and following fertility treatment.

10-year experience of Paediatric varicocele embolization in a tertiary centre with long-term follow-up.

INTRODUCTION: Paediatric varicocele embolization has many benefits over surgical ligation, but lacks published long-term data. We investigated technical and clinical outcomes in this under reported patient group. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate technical success, complications and recurrence rates following varicocele embolization in paediatric patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A single-centre retrospective review of procedural data and electronic notes of consecutive patients referred for varicocele embolization over a 10-year period was performed (February 2010-March 2020). The primary outcomes were technical success and clinical efficacy (lack of symptom recurrence). Secondary outcomes included complications, testicular vein size reduction and procedural parameters including radiation exposure. Chi-square analysis was used to identify predictors of clinical success. Follow-up involved outpatient clinical assessment and telephone interview. RESULTS: 40 patients (median age 15) were referred for left-sided symptomatic varicocele. Technical embolization success was achieved in 36/40 patients (90%), with 4 procedures abandoned (inaccessible vein). Embolization technique was platinum-based coils ± sclerosant. There were no immediate or long-term procedural complications. 32/36 patients completed short term follow-up at a median interval of 2.8 months. 30/32 (93.78%) experienced early clinical success. We found a significant reduction in peritesticular vein size following embolization (pre-3.70 vs post-2.56 mm, p = 0.00017) and a significant relationship between varicocele grade and early clinical success (χ2 = 4.2, p = 0.04), but not pre-treatment peritesticular vein size (χ2 = 0.02, p = 0.88). 33/36 patients completed long-term follow-up (median 4.2 years, range 0.36-9.9 years) producing a late clinical success rate of 93.9% (31/33). No post procedural complications including hydroceles were identified. DISCUSSION: This study demonstrates technical success, matching rates described in adult patients which is reassuring and in support of embolization in the younger patient cohort. More importantly, the overall clinical success rate is comparable with previous embolization studies. Reassuringly, all symptom recurrences occurred early in follow-up, and there is a cogent argument for a single follow-up appointment at this juncture. Our long-term average follow-up duration, primarily gained via telephone interview, exceeds other studies. Although our study has the longest follow-up for varicocele embolization in children, it is limited by a few patients being lost to early and long-term follow-up. This is a recognised issue faced by studies attempting to follow-up benign conditions with a high clinical success rate. CONCLUSION: Paediatric varicocele embolization is a successful alternative to surgical ligation, with no complications and good clinical outcomes over a long-term follow-up.

COVID-19 and varicocele: The possible overlap factors and the common therapeutic approaches.

Varicocele is recognized as one of the main attributable causes of male infertility which can affect spermatogenesis by various pathophysiological mechanisms. Recent studies have identified oxidative stress and reduction in antioxidant, hyperthermia, hypoxia, hormonal dysfunction, and inflammatory conditions as major factors in the pathophysiology of varicocele, all of which have known direct associations with the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and can significantly increase the risk of detrimental COVID-19-related outcomes. Emerging data have shown an association between COVID-19 and inflammation, overproduction of cytokine, and other pathophysiological processes. The present review, summarizes the current understanding of the pathophysiology of varicocele and investigates the potential correlation between the severity of COVID-19 and the varicocele disease. In addition, various possible treatments which can be effective in both diseases were examined. Despite numerous challenges associated with the prevalence of COVID-19 in healthcare systems in infected countries, special attention should be given to maintaining a high level of care for complex patients with a pre-existing disease such as varicocele and providing appropriate practical advice for optimal control of the COVID-19 disease.

[Pricking-reinforcing -reducing therapy improves semen quality and seminal plasma biochemical indexes in patients with varicocele infertility].

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of pricking-reinforcing -reducing therapy (PRRT) on the semen quality and seminal plasma biochemical indexes of varicocele (VC) infertility patients. METHODS: We randomly and equally assigned 160 patients with VC infertility into a PRRT and a control group, the former treated by PRRT and the latter with oral ShengjingCapsules. Before and after treatment, we obtained the semen parameters, sperm morphology, sperm survival rate, sperm acrosin activity, seminal plasma neutral α glucosidase and seminal plasma zinc in the patients and compared them between the two groups. RESULTS: Before treatment, there were no statistically significant differences between the PRRT and control groups in sperm concentration (ï¼»16.81 ± 7.83ï¼½ vs ï¼»16.80 ± 7.54ï¼½ ×106 /ml, P > 0.05), total sperm count (ï¼»42.01 ± 19.57ï¼½ vs ï¼»41.99 ± 18.84ï¼½ ×106, P > 0.05), percentages of progressively motile sperm (PMS) (ï¼»15.37 ± 11.03ï¼½% vs ï¼»14.68 ± 10.27ï¼½%, P > 0.05) and morphologically normal sperm ( MNS) (1.62 ± 1.51ï¼½% vs ï¼»1.62 ± 1.13ï¼½%, P > 0.05), sperm survival rate (ï¼»28.11 ± 18.95ï¼½% vs ï¼»28.23±18.38ï¼½%, P > 0.05) and sperm acrosin activity (ï¼»28.11 ± 14.64ï¼½ vs ï¼»27.19 ± 14.07ï¼½ U/L, P > 0.05). After three months of treatment, all the patients showed evident increases in the above parameters (P < 0.05), even higher in the PRRT than in the control group, more significantly in sperm concentration (ï¼»38.88 ± 30.54ï¼½ vs ï¼»25.60 ± 14.71ï¼½ ×106 /ml, P < 0.05), PMS (ï¼»32.60 ± 12.46ï¼½% vs ï¼»27.67 ± 12.27ï¼½%, P < 0.05) and sperm acrosin activity (ï¼»65.74±31.81ï¼½ vs ï¼»67.94±17.95ï¼½ U/L, P < 0.05), though not significantly in total sperm count (97.20 ± 76.35ï¼½ vs ï¼»88.19 ± 39.56ï¼½ ×106, P > 0.05), MNS (ï¼»2.35 ± 1.83ï¼½% vs ï¼»1.87 ± 1.20ï¼½%, P > 0.05) and sperm survival rate (ï¼»61.44 ± 20.02ï¼½% vs ï¼»59.12 ± 22.48ï¼½%, P > 0.05). Compared with the baseline, after treatment, the patients in the PRRT group also exhibited elevated levels of neutral α-glucosidase (ï¼»14.42 ± 5.90ï¼½ vs ï¼»28.43 ± 19.76ï¼½ U/L, P < 0.05) and seminal plasma zinc (ï¼»2.11 ± 1.22ï¼½ vs ï¼»2.89 ± 1.23ï¼½ mmol/L, P < 0.05), and so did the controls (ï¼»14.44 ± 5.61ï¼½ vs ï¼»26.66 ± 17.69ï¼½ U/L , P < 0.05) and (ï¼»2.09 ± 1.10ï¼½ vs ï¼»2.82±1.08ï¼½ mmol/L, P < 0.05). No statistically significant difference, however, was observed between the two groups after treatment (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: PRRT can significantly improve semen quality in patients with VC infertility, even more effective than ShengjingCapsules in improving sperm concentration, PMS, sperm survival rate, and sperm acrosin activity, which may be related to its effect of elevating the levels of seminal plasma neutral-α glucosidase and zinc providing sufficient energy for basic sperm metabolism, maturation, energy acquisition and motility.

Varicocele-Mediated Male Infertility: From the Perspective of Testicular Immunity and Inflammation.

Background: Varicocele (VC) is present in 35 - 40% of men with infertility. However, current surgical and antioxidant treatments are not completely effective. In addition to oxidative stress, it is likely that other factors such as testicular immune microenvironment disorder contribute to irreversible testicular. Evidence suggests that VC is associated with anti-sperm antibodies (ASAs), spermatogenesis and testosterone secretion abnormalities, and testicular cytokine production. Moreover, inhibition of inflammation can alleviate VC-mediated pathogenesis. The normal function of the testis depends on its immune tolerance mechanism. Testicular immune regulation is complex, and many infectious or non-infectious diseases may damage this precision system. Results: The testicular immune microenvironment is composed of common immune cells and other cells involved in testicular immunity. The former includes testicular macrophages, T cells, dendritic cells (DCs), and mast cells, whereas the latter include Leydig cells and Sertoli cells (SCs). In animal models and in patients with VC, most studies have revealed an abnormal increase in the levels of ASAs and pro-inflammatory cytokines such as interleukin (IL)-1 and tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-alpha in the seminal plasma, testicular tissue, and even peripheral blood. It is also involved in the activation of potential inflammatory pathways, such as the nucleotide-binding oligomerization domain-like receptor family pyrin domain containing (NLRP)-3 pathway. Finally, the development of VC-mediated infertility (VMI) may be facilitated by abnormal permeability of proteins, such as claudin-11, that constitute the blood-testis barrier (BTB). Conclusions: The testicular immune response, including the production of ASAs and inflammatory factors, activation of inflammatory pathways, and destruction of the BTB may be involved in the pathogenesis of VMI it is necessary to further explore how patient outcomes can be improved through immunotherapy.

Surgical or radiological treatment for varicoceles in subfertile men.

BACKGROUND: Varicoceles are associated with male subfertility; however, the mechanisms by which varicoceles affect fertility have yet to be satisfactorily explained. Several treatment options exist, including surgical or radiological treatment, however the safest and most efficient treatment remains unclear.  OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of surgical and radiological treatment of varicoceles on live birth rate, adverse events, pregnancy rate, varicocele recurrence, and quality of life amongst couples where the adult male has a varicocele, and the female partner of childbearing age has no fertility problems. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases on 4 April 2020: the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL. We also searched the trial registries and reference lists of articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) if they were relevant to the clinical question posed and compared different forms of surgical ligation, different forms of radiological treatments, surgical treatment compared to radiological treatment, or one of these aforementioned treatment forms compared to non-surgical methods, delayed treatment, or no treatment. We extracted data if the studies reported on live birth, adverse events, pregnancy, varicocele recurrence, and quality of life. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Screening of abstracts and full-text publications, alongside data extraction and 'Risk of bias' assessment, were done dually using the Covidence software. When we had sufficient data, we calculated random-effects (Mantel-Haenszel) meta-analyses; otherwise, we reported results narratively. We used the I2 statistic to analyse statistical heterogeneity. We planned to use funnel plots to assess publication bias in meta-analyses with at least 10 included studies. We dually rated the risk of bias of studies using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool, and the certainty of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 1897 citations after de-duplicating the search results. We excluded 1773 during title and abstract screening. From the 113 new full texts assessed in addition to the 10 studies (11 references) included in the previous version of this review, we included 38 new studies, resulting in a total of 48 studies (59 references) in the review providing data for 5384 participants. Two studies (three references) are ongoing studies and two studies are awaiting classification. Treatment versus non-surgical, non-radiological, delayed, or no treatment Two studies comparing surgical or radiological treatment versus no treatment reported on live birth with differing directions of effect. As a result, we are uncertain whether surgical or radiological treatment improves live birth rates when compared to no treatment (risk ratio (RR) 2.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.19 to 26.93; 2 RCTs, N = 204; I2 = 74%, very low-certainty evidence). Treatment may improve pregnancy rates compared to delayed or no treatment (RR 1.55, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.26; 13 RCTs, N = 1193; I2 = 65%, low-certainty evidence). This suggests that couples with no or delayed treatment have a 21% chance of pregnancy, whilst the pregnancy rate after surgical or radiological treatment is between 22% and 48%. We identified no evidence on adverse events, varicocele recurrence, or quality of life for this comparison. Surgical versus radiological treatment We are uncertain about the effect of surgical versus radiological treatment on live birth and on the following adverse events: hydrocele formation, pain, epididymitis, haematoma, and suture granuloma. We are uncertain about the effect of surgical versus radiological treatment on pregnancy rate (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.70; 5 RCTs, N = 456, low-certainty evidence) and varicocele recurrence (RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.82 to 2.08; 3 RCTs, N = 380, low-certainty evidence). We identified no evidence on quality of life for this comparison. Surgery versus other surgical treatment We identified 19 studies comparing microscopic subinguinal surgical treatment to any other surgical treatment. Microscopic subinguinal surgical treatment probably improves pregnancy rates slightly compared to other surgical treatments (RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.36; 12 RCTs, N = 1473, moderate-certainty evidence). This suggests that couples with microscopic subinguinal surgical treatment have a 10% to 14% chance of pregnancy after treatment, whilst the pregnancy rate in couples after other surgical treatments is 10%. This procedure also probably reduces the risk of varicocele recurrence (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.29, 0.79; 14 RCTs, N = 1565, moderate-certainty evidence). This suggests that 0.4% to 1.1% of men undergoing microscopic subinguinal surgical treatment experience recurrent varicocele, whilst 1.4% of men undergoing other surgical treatments do. Results for the following adverse events were inconclusive: hydrocele formation, haematoma, abdominal distension, testicular atrophy, wound infection, scrotal pain, and oedema. We identified no evidence on live birth or quality of life for this comparison. Nine studies compared open inguinal surgical treatment to retroperitoneal surgical treatment. Due to small sample sizes and methodological limitations, we identified neither treatment type as superior or inferior to the other regarding adverse events, pregnancy rates, or varicocele recurrence. We identified no evidence on live birth or quality of life for this comparison. Radiological versus other radiological treatment One study compared two types of radiological treatment (sclerotherapy versus embolisation) and reported 13% varicocele recurrence in both groups. Due to the broad confidence interval, no valid conclusion could be drawn (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.16 to 6.20; 1 RCT, N = 30, very low-certainty evidence). We identified no evidence on live birth, adverse events, pregnancy, or quality of life for this comparison. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on the limited evidence, it remains uncertain whether any treatment (surgical or radiological) compared to no treatment in subfertile men may be of benefit on live birth rates; however, treatment may improve the chances for pregnancy. The evidence was also insufficient to determine whether surgical treatment was superior to radiological treatment. However, microscopic subinguinal surgical treatment probably improves pregnancy rates and reduces the risk of varicocele recurrence compared to other surgical treatments. High-quality, head-to-head comparative RCTs focusing on live birth rate and also assessing adverse events and quality of life are warranted.

Clinical outcome of pediatric and young adult subclinical varicoceles: a single-institution experience.

Subclinical varicocele represents an abnormality of veins of the pampiniform plexus on scrotal ultrasound (US) without a clinically palpable varicocele. Its significance remains unclear. While guidelines do not recommend surgical intervention, clinical management is variable. As there is limited information on long-term outcome of subclinical varicoceles due to challenges in diagnosis and management, we performed a single-institution, retrospective review of patients from October 1999 to October 2014 with subclinical varicocele and with available US studies reviewed by a single radiologist. Subclinical varicocele was defined as dilation of the pampiniform venous plexus on US involving ≥2 vessels with diameter >2.5 mm, without clinical varicocele on physical examination or prior inguinal surgery. Thirty-six of 98 patients identified were confirmed as having a subclinical varicocele and analyzed. The mean age at initial visit was 15.5 years, with a mean follow-up of 26.5 months. The majority were right-sided (69.4%, n = 25), usually with a contralateral clinical varicocele. Testicular asymmetry (>20% volume difference of the affected side by testicular atrophy index formula) was assessed in 9 patients with unilateral subclinical varicocele without contralateral clinical or subclinical varicocele and observed in 1 patient. Of 17 patients with follow-up, 3 (17.6%) progressed to clinical varicocele without asymmetric testicular volume, as most remained subclinical or resolved without surgery. In our experience, subclinical varicoceles appeared unlikely to progress to clinical varicoceles, to affect testicular volume, or to lead to surgery. Although our study is limited in numbers and follow-up, this information may aid clinical management strategies and guide future prospective studies.

Diagnosis and Treatment of Infertility in Men: AUA/ASRM Guideline PART II.

PURPOSE: The summary presented herein represents Part II of the two-part series dedicated to the Diagnosis and Treatment of Infertility in Men: AUA/ASRM Guideline. Part II outlines the appropriate management of the male in an infertile couple. Medical therapies, surgical techniques, as well as use of intrauterine insemination (IUI)/in vitro fertilization (IVF)/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) are covered to allow for optimal patient management. Please refer to Part I for discussion on evaluation of the infertile male and discussion of relevant health conditions that are associated with male infertility. MATERIALS/METHODS: The Emergency Care Research Institute Evidence-based Practice Center team searched PubMed®, Embase®, and Medline from January 2000 through May 2019. When sufficient evidence existed, the body of evidence was assigned a strength rating of A (high), B (moderate), or C (low) for support of Strong, Moderate, or Conditional Recommendations. In the absence of sufficient evidence, additional information is provided as Clinical Principles and Expert Opinions (table[Table: see text]). This summary is being simultaneously published in Fertility and Sterility and The Journal of Urology. RESULTS: This Guideline provides updated, evidence-based recommendations regarding management of male infertility. Such recommendations are summarized in the associated algorithm (figure[Figure: see text]). CONCLUSION: Male contributions to infertility are prevalent, and specific treatment as well as assisted reproductive techniques are effective at managing male infertility. This document will undergo additional literature reviews and updating as the knowledge regarding current treatments and future treatment options continues to expand.