Introduction: Varicocele affects up to 15% of men in the general population. In couples with subfertility, the prevalence of varicocele in male partners was about 12%. In certain countries like the Middle East and Arabian Gulf, it is not rare to find people in their 5th or 6th decades or even older, who are seeking infertility clinics wishing to achieve paternity. Objectives: What are the results of laparoscopic varicocelectomy in relatively older infertile men (>40 years) in comparison with young infertile men (<40 years)? Methods: It is a prospective observational study done in Farwaniya Hospital, Kuwait. Patients (83 cases) were categorized into two age groups: group I (55 patients) with age ranging from 25 to 40 years, and group II (28 patients) with age >40 years (range 41-53 years). Cases with clinically detectable varicocele only were included (grade II and III). Cases who underwent varicocelectomy for pain were excluded from the study as well as cases with previous abdominal surgeries. Cases with subclinical and mild varicocele (grade I) were also excluded from the study. The intra- and postoperative parameters as well as the improvement in semen quality were compared in both groups. Patients were seen after 3 and 6 months as outpatients. Cases were followed up for a mean period of 1 year (range from 6 to 22 months). Results: The intraoperative and postoperative parameters as well as the improvement in semen quality were compared in both groups. There was colonic adhesion to the posterior peritoneum covering internal spermatic veins in 3 cases in group I (3.6%) and in 5 cases in group II (17.8%). This required more dissection to retract the colon and to expose the internal spermatic veins. The mean operative duration for laparoscopic varicocelectomy was significantly longer in group II (75 vs. 45 min in group I). After 3 months, 26 cases (47.2%) of group I and 11 cases (39.2%) of group II had improvement in semen quality. After 6 months, there was improvement in semen quality in 32 cases (58.2%) in group I and in 15 cases in group II (53.5%). Conclusions: Laparoscopic varicocelectomy in relatively old men is sometimes more difficult technically with relatively longer operative duration. However, it can achieve improvement in semen quality comparable to relatively younger patients. Further randomized controlled trials are needed to draw a more relevant conclusion about the impact of age in the outcome of laparoscopic varicocelectomy.

Keywords:
Laparoscopy, Infertility, Aging males
1.
Evers JL, Collins JA: Surgery or Embolisation for Varicocele in Subfertile Men. The Cochrane Library: Issue 3, 2006. Chichester, Wiley, 2003.
2.
World Health Organization: The influence of varicocele on parameters of fertility in a large group of men presenting to infertility clinics. Fertil Steril 1992;57:1289-1293.
3.
Sharlip ID, Jarow JP, Belker AM, Lipshultz LI, Sigman M, Thomas AJ, Schlegel PN, Howards SS, Nehra A, Damewood MB, Overstreet JW, Sadovsky R: Best practice policies for male infertility. Fertil Steril 2002;77:873-882.
4.
Dohle GR, Colpi GM, Hargreave TB, Papp GK, Jungwirth A, Weidner W, EAU Working Group on Male Infertility: EAU guidelines on male infertility. Eur Urol 2005;48:703-711.
5.
Chen SS, Chen LK: Predictive factors of successful varicocelectomy in infertile patients. Urol Int 2011;86:320-324.
6.
Ficarra V, Cerruto MA, Ligouri G, Mazzano G, Minucci S, Tracia A, Gentile V: Treatment of varicocele in subfertile men: the Cochrane review - a contrary opinion. Eur Urol 2006;49:258-263.
7.
Marmar JL, Agarwal A, Prabakaran S, Agarwal R, Short RA, Benoff S, Thomas AJ Jr: Reassessing the value of varicocelectomy as treatment for male subfertility with a new meta-analysis. Fertil Steril 2007;88:639-648.
8.
Palomo A: Radical cure of varicocele by a new technique: preliminary report. J Urol 1949;61:604-607.
9.
Ivanissevich O: Left varicocele due to reflux; experience with 4,470 operative cases in forty-two years. J Int Coll Surg 1960;34:742-755.
10.
Nagler HM, Luntz RK, Martinis FG: Varicocele; in Lipshultz LI, Howards SS (eds): Infertility in the Male, ed 3. St Louis, Mosby-Year Book, 1997, pp 336-359.
11.
Çayan S, Erdemir F, Ozbey I, Turek PJ, Kadioğlu A, Tellaloğlu S: Can varicocelectomy significantly change the way couples use assisted reproductive technologies? J Urol 2002;167:1749-1752.
12.
Çayan S, Kadioğlu TC, Tefekli A, Kadioğlu A, Tellaloğlu S: Comparison of results and complications of high ligation surgery and microsurgical high inguinal varicocelectomy in the treatment of varicocele. Urology 2000;55:750-754.
13.
Tefekli A, Çayan S, Uluocak N, Poyanli A, Alp T, Kadioğlu A: Is selective internal spermatic venography necessary in detecting recurrent varicocele after surgical repair? Eur Urol 2001;40:404-408.
14.
Cayan S, Shavakhabov S, Kadioğlu A: Treatment of palpable varicocele in infertile men: a meta-analysis to define the best technique. J Androl 2009;30:33-40.
15.
Pan F, Pan L, Zhang A, Liu Y, Zhang F, Dai Y: Comparison of two approaches in microsurgical varicocelectomy in Chinese infertile males. Urol Int 2013;90:443-448.
16.
Salas Cabrera R, Ramírez Torres C, Sagué Larrea J, Laurencio Mena A: Laparoscopic varicocelectomy in the adult patient. Arch Esp Urol 2008;61:815-818.
17.
Al-Kandari AM, Shabaan H, Ibrahim HM, Elshebiny YH, Shokeir AA: Comparison of outcomes of different varicocelectomy techniques: open inguinal, laparoscopic, and subinguinal microscopic varicocelectomy: a randomized clinical trial. Urology 2007;69:417-420.
18.
Reşorlu B, Kara C, Sahin E, Unsal A: The significance of age on success of surgery for patients with varicocele. Int Urol Nephrol 2010;42:351-356.
19.
Ishikawa T, Fujisawa M: Effect of age and grade on surgery for patients with varicocele. Urology 2005;65:768-772.
20.
Hsiao W, Rosoff JS, Pale JR, Greenwood EA, Goldstein M: Older age is associated with similar improvements in semen parameters and testosterone after subinguinal microsurgical varicocelectomy. J Urol 2011;185:620-625.
21.
Hassan JM, Adams MC, Pope JC 4th, Demarco RT, Brock JW 3rd: Hydrocele formation following laparoscopic varicocelectomy. J Urol 2006;175:1076-1079.
22.
Kocvara R, Dvoracek J, Sedlacek J, Dite Z, Novak K: Lymphatic sparing laparoscopic varicocelectomy: a microsurgical repair. J Urol 2005;173:1751-1754.
23.
Misseri R, Gershbein AB, Horowitz M, Glassberg KI: The adolescent varicocele. II. The incidence of hydrocele and delayed recurrent varicocele after varicocelectomy in right subinguinal microvaricocelectomy versus retroperitoneal varicocelectomy: comparative study of complications and surgical outcome. Urology 2004;64:1005-1009.
24.
Aaberg RA, Vancaillie TG, Schuessler WW: Laparoscopic varicocele ligation: a new technique. Fertil Steril 1991;56:776-777.
25.
Madgar I, Weissenberg R, Lunenfeld B, Karasik A, Goldwasser B: Controlled trial of high spermatic vein ligation for varicocele in infertile men. Fertil Steril 1995;63:120-124.
26.
Nieschlag E, Behre HM, Fischedick A, Hertle L: Treatment of varicocele in the age of ‘evidence-based medicine'. Medical counseling is as successful as interventional treatment (ligation or embolization). Urologe A 1998;37:265-269.
27.
Pryor JL, Howards SS: Varicocele. Urol Clin North Am 1987;14:499-513.
28.
Enquist E, Stein BS, Sigman M: Laparoscopic versus subinguinal varicocelectomy: a comparative study. Fertil Steril 1994;61:1092-1096.
29.
Murray RR Jr, Mitchell SE, Kadir S, Kaufman SL, Chang R, Kinnison ML, Smyth JW, White RI Jr: Comparison of recurrent varicocele anatomy following surgery and percutaneous balloon occlusion. J Urol 1986;135:286-289.
30.
Belloli G, Musi L, D'Agostino S: Laparoscopic surgery for adolescent varicocele: preliminary report on 80 patients. J Pediatr Surg 1996;31:1488-1490.
31.
Chen C: Varicocele in male factor infertility: role of laparoscopic varicocelectomy. Int Surg 2006;91(suppl 5):S90-S94.
© 2013 S. Karger AG, Basel
2013
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.