title: Preoperative predictors of varicocelectomy success in the treatment of testicular pain.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  We performed the present study to evaluate the prognostic factors for the surgical outcome of varicocelectomy in the treatment of a painful varicocele.
  
  
  METHODS
  A total of 77 patients undergoing varicocelectomy were enrolled. All the patients were examined for body mass index (BMI), varicocele grade, testosterone, follicle stimulating hormone (FSH), luteinizing hormone (LH), semen analysis, maximal vein diameter, and discrepancy of testicular volume. At a follow-up visit 3~6 months after the surgery, the patient response was graded as a complete response, partial response, or no response. The resolution of pain was defined as a complete or partial response. We used logistic regression analyses to determine the preoperative factors for predicting a complete response and the resolution of pain.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Ten subjects were lost to follow-up. The remaining 67 patients were included in this study. The pain was completely resolved in 47.8% of patients, partial resolution was observed in 25.4% of patients, and failure was reported in 26.9% of patients. Among the parameters, only a longer duration of pain (≥3 months) was an independent factor related to the complete response of pain (odds ratio, 7.371; p=0.010) and the resolution of pain (odds ratio, 7.209; p=0.042). The parameters of semen analysis results, testosterone, LH, FSH, BMI, grade, ultrasonography results, and the type of surgical approach did not significantly predict the resolution of pain.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The duration of pain (≥3 months) was an independent prognostic factor for the complete response of pain and the resolution of pain.
authors: Department of Urology, National Police Hospital, Seoul, Korea.
authors: Yeon Won
authors: YW
authors: Park
authors: Jun Ho
authors: JH
authors: Lee
keywords: Laparoscopy; Microsurgery; Pain; Varicocele
references: Urology. 1982 Jun;19(6):641-4
references: 7090115
references: Urology. 2000 Jan;55(1):107-8
references: 10654904
references: Urology. 2012 Sep;80(3):585-9
references: 22784493
references: J Urol. 1992 Aug;148(2 Pt 2):694-6
references: 1640548
references: Curr Opin Urol. 2012 Nov;22(6):499-506
references: 22965318
references: Asian J Androl. 2011 Sep;13(5):754-8
references: 21102471
references: J Urol. 1996 Mar;155(3):1005-7
references: 8583547
references: J Urol. 1998 May;159(5):1565-7
references: 9554356
references: Urol Int. 2007;79(1):33-6
references: 17627165
references: Yonsei Med J. 2012 Jan;53(1):145-50
references: 22187245
references: Int Braz J Urol. 2010 Jan-Feb;36(1):55-9
references: 20202236
references: J Urol. 1997 Aug;158(2):605-7
references: 9224376
references: J Urol. 1994 Oct;152(4):1127-32
references: 8072081