Background/Aims: The role of cyst fluid carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level in differentiating mucinous pancreatic cystic lesions (PCLs) is controversial. We investigated the role of cyst fluid CEA in differentiating low-risk (LR)-intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs) from high-risk (HR)-IPMNs and LR-mucinous cystic neoplasms (MCNs). Methods: This was a retrospective study of 466 patients with PCLs who underwent endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needleaspiration over a 7-year period. On histology, low-grade dysplasia and intermediate-grade dysplasia were considered LR, whereas high-grade dysplasia and invasive carcinoma were considered HR. Results: Data on cyst fluid CEA levels were available for 50/102 mucinous PCLs with definitive diagnoses. The median CEA (range) levels were significantly higher in HR cysts than in LR cysts (2,624 [0.5–266,510] ng/mL vs. 100 [16.8–53,445]ng/mL, p=0.0012). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was 0.930 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.5–0.8; p<0.001) for differentiating LR-IPMNs from LR-MCNs. The AUROC was 0.921 (95% CI, 0.823–1.000; p<0.001) for differentiating LR-IPMNs from HR-IPMNs. Both had a CEA cutoff level of >100ng/mL, with a negative predictive value (NPV) of 100%. Conclusions Cyst fluid CEA levels significantly vary between LR-IPMNs, LR-MCNs, and HR-IPMNs. A CEA cutoff level of >100ng/mL had a 100% NPV in differentiating LR-IPMNs from LR-MCNs and HR-IPMNs.

Purpose: Despite the significant role of varicocele in the pathogenesis of male infertility, its association with anti-sperm antibodies (ASA) remains controversial. This systematic review and meta-analysis (SRMA) aims to investigate the frequency of ASA positivity in men with varicocele. Materials and Methods: This SRMA is conducted in accordance with the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines. We investigated the frequency of ASA positivity in ejaculates or serum of men with varicocele as compared to men without varicocele (controls). A literature search was performed using the Scopus and PubMed databases following the Population Exposure Comparison Outcome, Study Design model. Data extracted from eligible studies were meta-analyzed and expressed as odds ratios (ORs) and confidence intervals (CIs). Results: Out of 151 abstracts identified during the initial screening, 6 articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. Using mixed antiglobulin reaction (MAR) assay, 61 out of the 153 (39.8%) patients with varicocele tested positive for ASA in their ejaculates as compared to 22 out of the 129 control subjects (17%, OR=4.34 [95% CI: 1.09–17.28]; p=0.04). Using direct or indirect immunobead test, 30 out of 60 cases diagnosed with varicocele (50%) had shown ASA positivity in their ejaculates as compared to 16 out of 104 controls (15.4%, OR=3.57 [95% CI: 0.81–15.68]; p=0.09). Using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), out of 89 varicocele patients, 33 (37.1%) tested positive for serum ASA as compared to 9 out of 57 participants in the control group (15.8%, OR=7.87 [95% CI: 2.39–25.89]; p<0.01). Conclusions This SRMA indicates that ASA positivity is significantly higher among men with varicocele when tested by direct method (MAR) or indirect method (ELISA). This data suggests an immunological pathology in infertile men with varicocele and may have implications for the management of these patients.

Purpose: Despite the significant role of varicocele in the pathogenesis of male infertility, its association with anti-sperm antibodies (ASA) remains controversial. This systematic review and meta-analysis (SRMA) aims to investigate the frequency of ASA positivity in men with varicocele. Materials and Methods: This SRMA is conducted in accordance with the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines. We investigated the frequency of ASA positivity in ejaculates or serum of men with varicocele as compared to men without varicocele (controls). A literature search was performed using the Scopus and PubMed databases following the Population Exposure Comparison Outcome, Study Design model. Data extracted from eligible studies were meta-analyzed and expressed as odds ratios (ORs) and confidence intervals (CIs). Results: Out of 151 abstracts identified during the initial screening, 6 articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. Using mixed antiglobulin reaction (MAR) assay, 61 out of the 153 (39.8%) patients with varicocele tested positive for ASA in their ejaculates as compared to 22 out of the 129 control subjects (17%, OR=4.34 [95% CI: 1.09–17.28]; p=0.04). Using direct or indirect immunobead test, 30 out of 60 cases diagnosed with varicocele (50%) had shown ASA positivity in their ejaculates as compared to 16 out of 104 controls (15.4%, OR=3.57 [95% CI: 0.81–15.68]; p=0.09). Using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), out of 89 varicocele patients, 33 (37.1%) tested positive for serum ASA as compared to 9 out of 57 participants in the control group (15.8%, OR=7.87 [95% CI: 2.39–25.89]; p<0.01). Conclusions This SRMA indicates that ASA positivity is significantly higher among men with varicocele when tested by direct method (MAR) or indirect method (ELISA). This data suggests an immunological pathology in infertile men with varicocele and may have implications for the management of these patients.

Purpose: Despite the significant role of varicocele in the pathogenesis of male infertility, its association with anti-sperm antibodies (ASA) remains controversial. This systematic review and meta-analysis (SRMA) aims to investigate the frequency of ASA positivity in men with varicocele. Materials and Methods: This SRMA is conducted in accordance with the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines. We investigated the frequency of ASA positivity in ejaculates or serum of men with varicocele as compared to men without varicocele (controls). A literature search was performed using the Scopus and PubMed databases following the Population Exposure Comparison Outcome, Study Design model. Data extracted from eligible studies were meta-analyzed and expressed as odds ratios (ORs) and confidence intervals (CIs). Results: Out of 151 abstracts identified during the initial screening, 6 articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. Using mixed antiglobulin reaction (MAR) assay, 61 out of the 153 (39.8%) patients with varicocele tested positive for ASA in their ejaculates as compared to 22 out of the 129 control subjects (17%, OR=4.34 [95% CI: 1.09–17.28]; p=0.04). Using direct or indirect immunobead test, 30 out of 60 cases diagnosed with varicocele (50%) had shown ASA positivity in their ejaculates as compared to 16 out of 104 controls (15.4%, OR=3.57 [95% CI: 0.81–15.68]; p=0.09). Using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), out of 89 varicocele patients, 33 (37.1%) tested positive for serum ASA as compared to 9 out of 57 participants in the control group (15.8%, OR=7.87 [95% CI: 2.39–25.89]; p<0.01). Conclusions This SRMA indicates that ASA positivity is significantly higher among men with varicocele when tested by direct method (MAR) or indirect method (ELISA). This data suggests an immunological pathology in infertile men with varicocele and may have implications for the management of these patients.

Purpose: Despite the significant role of varicocele in the pathogenesis of male infertility, its association with anti-sperm antibodies (ASA) remains controversial. This systematic review and meta-analysis (SRMA) aims to investigate the frequency of ASA positivity in men with varicocele. Materials and Methods: This SRMA is conducted in accordance with the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines. We investigated the frequency of ASA positivity in ejaculates or serum of men with varicocele as compared to men without varicocele (controls). A literature search was performed using the Scopus and PubMed databases following the Population Exposure Comparison Outcome, Study Design model. Data extracted from eligible studies were meta-analyzed and expressed as odds ratios (ORs) and confidence intervals (CIs). Results: Out of 151 abstracts identified during the initial screening, 6 articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. Using mixed antiglobulin reaction (MAR) assay, 61 out of the 153 (39.8%) patients with varicocele tested positive for ASA in their ejaculates as compared to 22 out of the 129 control subjects (17%, OR=4.34 [95% CI: 1.09–17.28]; p=0.04). Using direct or indirect immunobead test, 30 out of 60 cases diagnosed with varicocele (50%) had shown ASA positivity in their ejaculates as compared to 16 out of 104 controls (15.4%, OR=3.57 [95% CI: 0.81–15.68]; p=0.09). Using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), out of 89 varicocele patients, 33 (37.1%) tested positive for serum ASA as compared to 9 out of 57 participants in the control group (15.8%, OR=7.87 [95% CI: 2.39–25.89]; p<0.01). Conclusions This SRMA indicates that ASA positivity is significantly higher among men with varicocele when tested by direct method (MAR) or indirect method (ELISA). This data suggests an immunological pathology in infertile men with varicocele and may have implications for the management of these patients.

Purpose: Despite the significant role of varicocele in the pathogenesis of male infertility, its association with anti-sperm antibodies (ASA) remains controversial. This systematic review and meta-analysis (SRMA) aims to investigate the frequency of ASA positivity in men with varicocele. Materials and Methods: This SRMA is conducted in accordance with the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines. We investigated the frequency of ASA positivity in ejaculates or serum of men with varicocele as compared to men without varicocele (controls). A literature search was performed using the Scopus and PubMed databases following the Population Exposure Comparison Outcome, Study Design model. Data extracted from eligible studies were meta-analyzed and expressed as odds ratios (ORs) and confidence intervals (CIs). Results: Out of 151 abstracts identified during the initial screening, 6 articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. Using mixed antiglobulin reaction (MAR) assay, 61 out of the 153 (39.8%) patients with varicocele tested positive for ASA in their ejaculates as compared to 22 out of the 129 control subjects (17%, OR=4.34 [95% CI: 1.09–17.28]; p=0.04). Using direct or indirect immunobead test, 30 out of 60 cases diagnosed with varicocele (50%) had shown ASA positivity in their ejaculates as compared to 16 out of 104 controls (15.4%, OR=3.57 [95% CI: 0.81–15.68]; p=0.09). Using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), out of 89 varicocele patients, 33 (37.1%) tested positive for serum ASA as compared to 9 out of 57 participants in the control group (15.8%, OR=7.87 [95% CI: 2.39–25.89]; p<0.01). Conclusions This SRMA indicates that ASA positivity is significantly higher among men with varicocele when tested by direct method (MAR) or indirect method (ELISA). This data suggests an immunological pathology in infertile men with varicocele and may have implications for the management of these patients.

Purpose: Varicocele is a common problem among infertile men. Varicocele repair (VR) is frequently performed to improve semen parameters and the chances of pregnancy. However, there is a lack of consensus about the diagnosis, indications for VR and its outcomes. The aim of this study was to explore global practice patterns on the management of varicocele in the context of male infertility. Materials and Methods: Sixty practicing urologists/andrologists from 23 countries contributed 382 multiple-choice-questions pertaining to varicocele management. These were condensed into an online questionnaire that was forwarded to clinicians involved in male infertility management through direct invitation. The results were analyzed for disagreement and agreement in practice patterns and, compared with the latest guidelines of international professional societies (American Urological Association [AUA], American Society for Reproductive Medicine [ASRM], and European Association of Urology [EAU]), and with evidence emerging from recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Additionally, an expert opinion on each topic was provided based on the consensus of 16 experts in the field. Results: The questionnaire was answered by 574 clinicians from 59 countries. The majority of respondents were urologists/ uro-andrologists. A wide diversity of opinion was seen in every aspect of varicocele diagnosis, indications for repair, choice of technique, management of sub-clinical varicocele and the role of VR in azoospermia. A significant proportion of the responses were at odds with the recommendations of AUA, ASRM, and EAU. A large number of clinical situations were identified where no guidelines are available. Conclusions This study is the largest global survey performed to date on the clinical management of varicocele for male infertility. It demonstrates: 1) a wide disagreement in the approach to varicocele management, 2) large gaps in the clinical practice guidelines from professional societies, and 3) the need for further studies on several aspects of varicocele management in infertile men.