The purpose of this report was to compare two different procedures in the treatment of idiopathic hydrocele, namely, hydrocelectomy and percutaneous sclerotherapy, both of which performed in the outpatient or day surgery setting. A detailed description of the technical local anaesthesia steps is reported together with the sclerotherapy method. The study was conducted in 71 patients with a total of 77 hydroceles treated from 1993 to 2004. Surgery was carried out in 53 cases and sclerotherapy in 24. The latter was more frequently opted for elderly subjects as well as in those patients who requested it. Local or locoregional anaesthesia was reserved to patients treated surgically. The two treatments were compared on the basis of the following parameters: age, operative time, length of hospital stay, success rate and complications. The efficacy of the two procedures was comparable (sclerotherapy 95.8% vs surgery 100%), but sclerotherapy proved more favourable in terms of simplicity, rapidity of execution, shortness of hospital stay and risk of complications. However, 41.7% of patients required more than one treatment to obtain a radical cure, whereas surgery was effective in all cases in just one step. Hospital stay and morbidity were almost the same when surgery was performed under local anaesthesia. Sclerotherapy is an efficient alternative to the classic hydrocelectomy. The choice between the two treatment modalities should be made, taking into account above all the patient's individual preference.
Sclerotherapy and hydrocelectomy for the management of hydrocele in outpatient and day-surgery setting [Il trattamento chirurgico e scleroterapico dell'idrocele in regime ambulatoriale e di day-surgery]
ERDAS, ENRICO;PISANO, GIUSEPPE;
2006-01-01
Abstract
The purpose of this report was to compare two different procedures in the treatment of idiopathic hydrocele, namely, hydrocelectomy and percutaneous sclerotherapy, both of which performed in the outpatient or day surgery setting. A detailed description of the technical local anaesthesia steps is reported together with the sclerotherapy method. The study was conducted in 71 patients with a total of 77 hydroceles treated from 1993 to 2004. Surgery was carried out in 53 cases and sclerotherapy in 24. The latter was more frequently opted for elderly subjects as well as in those patients who requested it. Local or locoregional anaesthesia was reserved to patients treated surgically. The two treatments were compared on the basis of the following parameters: age, operative time, length of hospital stay, success rate and complications. The efficacy of the two procedures was comparable (sclerotherapy 95.8% vs surgery 100%), but sclerotherapy proved more favourable in terms of simplicity, rapidity of execution, shortness of hospital stay and risk of complications. However, 41.7% of patients required more than one treatment to obtain a radical cure, whereas surgery was effective in all cases in just one step. Hospital stay and morbidity were almost the same when surgery was performed under local anaesthesia. Sclerotherapy is an efficient alternative to the classic hydrocelectomy. The choice between the two treatment modalities should be made, taking into account above all the patient's individual preference.
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
