Comparison of the therapeutic efficacy of different methods of anesthesia in microscopic varicocelectomy for the treatment of varicocele.
- Author:
Qun-Sheng LI
1
;
Ning-Hua LI
1
;
Lei ZHOU
2
;
Dong-Run LI
2
;
Jie LU
1
;
Chun-Yan HE
2
;
Yu-Nu ZHOU
1
;
Jian-Mo CHEN
1
;
Wen-Tao YANG
2
Author Information
1. Graduate School, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi 530001, China.
2. Department of Andrology, Ruikang Hospital Affiliated to Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, Guangxi 530011, China.
- Publication Type:English Abstract
- Keywords:
local anesthesia;
spinal anesthesia;
varicocele;
microsurgical varicocelectomy;
retrospective cohort study
- MeSH:
Humans;
Male;
Varicocele/surgery*;
Retrospective Studies;
Microsurgery;
Anesthesia, Spinal;
Adult;
Treatment Outcome;
Anesthesia, Local
- From:
National Journal of Andrology
2025;31(8):692-697
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE:To compare the therapeutic efficacy and safety of local anesthesia and spinal anesthesia for the patients with varicocele (VC) who underwent microsurgical varicocelectomy (MV).
METHODS:We retrospectively analyzed the data of VC patients who underwent MV treatment at the Andrology Department of the Affiliated Ruikang Hospital of Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine from May 2020 to March 2023. Cases with complete clinical data and follow-up evaluation were selected and divided into a control group (spinal anesthesia) and an observation group (local anesthesia) according to different anesthesia methods. The surgical time (including anesthesia time), visual analogue scale (VAS) score for pain, hospital stay, treatment cost, sperm concentration, forward motile sperm rate, and normal sperm morphology rate after three months of surgery, as well as postoperative complications and recurrence rate were compared between the two groups.
RESULTS:A total of 107 eligible cases were included, with 56 cases in the control group and 51 cases in the observation group. There was no significant difference in the VAS score for pain during and after four hours of surgery, as well as postoperative complications, and recurrence rate between the two groups (P> 0.05). There was an significant increase in sperm concentration, forward motile sperm rate, and normal sperm morphology rate in both of two groups after three months of surgery (P<0.05). However, there was no significant difference between the two groups three months after surgery (P>0.05). The surgical time and hospital stay were shorter than those of the control group (P<0.05). And the treatment cost in observation group was lower than that of the control group (P<0.05).
CONCLUSION:Both local anesthesia and lumbar anesthesia for MV treatment of VC have good efficacy and safety. However, patients treated with MV under local anesthesia for VC have obvious advantages in terms of operation time (including anesthesia time), hospital stay, and treatment cost, which is worthy of clinical promotion and application.
