Introduction and Objectives
To compare outcomes of endoscopic treatment of hydrocele with conventional open hydrocelectomy regarding complications and patient satisfaction.
Material and Methods
Patients with clinically significant hydroceles were prospectively enrolled into two treatment groups. Groups 1 and 2 consisted of patients who underwent endoscopic (n = 26) and open surgical treatments (n = 27), respectively. Outcome measures were per and postoperative complications and recurrence rates. Postoperative comfort and patients’ satisfaction of cosmetic appearance after the operation was evaluated with a questionnaire at discharge and at day 10 after the intervention.
Results
Average follow-ups were 17 months for both Groups 1 and 2. Hydrocele recurred in the first two cases in Group 1, during the education period. No recurrence was encountered in Group 2. As a complication, moderate to severe edemaoccurred in 4 cases in the endoscopic group. In the open surgery group, significant edema and hematoma occurred in 8 and 2 cases, respectively. One case with hematoma resulted with wound dehiscence. On the first and tenth postoperative days, endoscopic procedure was found more cosmetically acceptable and covered a more comfortable convalescence period when compared to open surgical group (p < 0.05). In Groups 1 and 2, 87 and 70% of the patients, respectively, declared that they would recommend this procedure to their friends (p < 0.05).
Conclusions
Endoscopic method is a viable option in the treatment of hydrocele. Outstanding feature of the endoscopic method is an earlier achievement of a better cosmetic outcome and a comfortable postoperative period when compared with the conventional treatment.
Article info
Identification
Copyright
© 2009 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
