COMPARISON OF LAPAROSCOPIC VERSUS MICROSURGICAL VERICOCELECTOMY IN TERMS OF SPERM COUNT

Authors

  • Mir Abid Jan Institute Of Kidney Diseases Hayatabad Medical Complex Peshawar, Pakistan. Author
  • Khalil Ur Rehman Institute of Kidney Diseases, Peshawar, Pakistan. Author
  • Naveed Ahmad Khan Institute Of Kidney Diseases Hmc-Kgmc Mti Peshawar, Pakistan. Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.71000/5g8vq868

Keywords:

Male infertility, varicocele, varicocelectomy, Infertility, Laparoscopy, Microsurgery, Sperm count

Abstract

Background: Infertility affects nearly 15% of couples of reproductive age, with male factors contributing to 40–50% of cases. Varicocele, an abnormal dilation of the pampiniform plexus veins, is one of the most common reversible causes of male infertility, observed in approximately 16–21% of men presenting to infertility clinics. It impairs spermatogenesis through testicular hyperthermia and venous congestion, leading to poor semen quality. Surgical correction through varicocelectomy remains the mainstay of treatment, with microscopic and laparoscopic techniques being the most widely practiced.

Objective: To compare the improvement in sperm count following laparoscopic and microscopic sub-inguinal varicocelectomy in infertile males diagnosed with varicocele.

Methods: This randomized controlled trial was conducted at the Department of Urology, Hayatabad Medical Complex, Peshawar, from January 1, 2025, to June 30, 2025. A total of 80 males aged 18–40 years with Doppler-confirmed unilateral varicocele were enrolled and randomly divided into two equal groups. Group A (n=40) underwent microscopic sub-inguinal varicocelectomy, while Group B (n=40) underwent laparoscopic varicocelectomy. Semen analyses were performed preoperatively and at four months postoperatively. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 22, applying paired t-tests for within-group and independent t-tests for between-group comparisons, with a p-value <0.05 considered significant.

Results: The mean preoperative sperm count in the microscopic group was 13.68 ± 4.77 million/mL, increasing to 23.86 ± 6.14 million/mL postoperatively (t = −20.03, p < 0.001). In the laparoscopic group, counts rose from 15.25 ± 3.79 million/mL to 21.55 ± 4.42 million/mL (t = −13.84, p < 0.001). The between-group comparison showed a near-significant difference (t = 1.91, p = 0.061), suggesting a trend favoring the microscopic approach.

Conclusion: Both microscopic and laparoscopic varicocelectomy significantly improved sperm counts, confirming varicocelectomy as an effective surgical treatment for varicocele-related male infertility. The microscopic technique showed a slight advantage in enhancing spermatogenesis, though larger multicenter trials are needed to validate this difference.

Author Biographies

  • Mir Abid Jan, Institute Of Kidney Diseases Hayatabad Medical Complex Peshawar, Pakistan.

    Assistant Professor Andro-Urology Institute Of Kidney Diseases Hayatabad Medical Complex Peshawar, Pakistan.

  • Khalil Ur Rehman, Institute of Kidney Diseases, Peshawar, Pakistan.

     Registrar, Andro-Urology Institute of Kidney Diseases, Peshawar, Pakistan.

  • Naveed Ahmad Khan, Institute Of Kidney Diseases Hmc-Kgmc Mti Peshawar, Pakistan.

    Trainee Registrar Andro-Urology Unit Institute Of Kidney Diseases Hmc-Kgmc Mti Peshawar, Pakistan.

References

Babakhanzadeh E, Nazari M, Ghasemifar S, Khodadadian A. Some of the Factors Involved in Male Infertility: A Prospective Review. Int J Gen Med. 2020;13:29–41.

Kantartzi: Update on the role of varicocele in male... - Google Scholar [Internet]. [cited 2025 Aug 5].

Kotb S, Abdel-Rassoul MA, Elkousy MM, El-Shorbagy G, Elsayed AS, Abdel-Rahman S, et al. Comparison of the pulling technique versus the standard technique in microsurgical subinguinal varicocelectomy: a randomized controlled trial. African Journal of Urology. 2023 Dec 13;29(1):69.

Long-term effects of microsurgical varicocelectomy on pain and sperm parameters in clinical varicocele patients with sc… [Internet]. [cited 2025 Aug 6].

Mei Y, Ji N, Feng X, Xu R, Xue D. Don’t wait any longer, conceive in time: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on semen parameters after varicocelectomy. Int Urol Nephrol. 2024 Oct;56(10):3217–29.

Cannarella R, Shah R, Hamoda TAAAM, Boitrelle F, Saleh R, Gul M, et al. Does Varicocele Repair Improve Conventional Semen Parameters? A Meta-Analytic Study of Before-After Data. World J Mens Health. 2024 Jan;42(1):92–132.

Shahzad S, Waqar Shahid M, Azeem Mughal M, Ullah I, Rehman Khan A ur. Comparison of Open Sub-Inguinal and Microscopic Sub-Inguinal Varicocelectomy for Improvement of Sperm Parameters. PJMHS. 2021 Oct 30;15(10):2882–5.

Kaya C, Eryilmaz S, Kapisiz A, Atan A, Karabulut R, Türkyilmaz Z, et al. Use of intraoperative microvascular Doppler during subinguinal microsurgical varicocelectomy in children reduces complications. Turk J Med Sci. 2024;54(4):778-83.

Syarief AN, Rahman IA, Sangadji ARS, Djojodimedjo T, Rizaldi F. A systematic review and meta-analysis on the efficacy of internal spermatic artery ligation during laparoscopic varicocelectomy in children and adolescents: Is it safe? Arch Ital Urol Androl. 2023;95(3):11627.

Lu LJ, Xiong K, Yuan SL, Che BW, Zhai JC, Wu CC, et al. Surgical approaches to varicocele: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Asian J Androl. 2025;27(6):728-37.

Darves-Bornoz A, Panken E, Brannigan RE, Halpern JA. Robotic Surgery for Male Infertility. Urol Clin North Am. 2021;48(1):127-35.

Shomarufov AB, Bozhedomov VA, Sorokin NI, Matyukhov IP, Fozilov AA, Abbosov SA, et al. Predictors of microsurgical varicocelectomy efficacy in male infertility treatment: critical assessment and systematization. Asian J Androl. 2023;25(1):21-8.

Porto JG, Raymo A, Suarez Arbelaez MC, Gurayah AA, Ramasamy R. Patient Satisfaction and Long-Term Clinical Outcomes in Adolescent Sub-inguinal Microscopic Varicocelectomy. Cureus. 2023;15(8):e44349.

Su JS, Farber NJ, Vij SC. Pathophysiology and treatment options of varicocele: An overview. Andrologia. 2021;53(1):e13576.

Zhang G, Li J, Xu Z, Li J, Chen S. Microscopic Varicocelectomy under Local Anesthesia as the Treatment of Varicocele. J Vis Exp. 2024(212).

Al-Gadheeb A, El-Tholoth HS, Albalawi A, Althobity A, AlNumi M, Alafraa T, et al. Microscopic subinguinal varicocelectomy for testicular pain: a retrospective study on outcomes and predictors of pain relief. Basic Clin Androl. 2021;31(1):1.

Drlík M, Faltusová E, Vaĺová Z, Sedláček J, Dítě Z, Kočvara R. Laparoscopic lymphatic and artery sparing microsurgical varicocelectomy - technique, results and long-term outcomes. J Pediatr Urol. 2022;18(2):114.e1-.e6.

Kale S, Rashid T. Feasibility of loupe assisted subinguinal varicocelectomy in treatment of male infertility. Actas Urol Esp (Engl Ed). 2022;46(9):515-20.

Alkhamees M, Bin Hamri S, Alhumaid T, Alissa L, Al-Lishlish H, Abudalo R, et al. Factors Associated with Varicocele Recurrence After Microscopic Sub-Inguinal Varicocelectomy. Res Rep Urol. 2020;12:651-7.

Sharma S, Shimpi RK. Estimation of haemodynamic changes in varicocele testis and results after microsurgical sub-inguinal varicocelectomy. Urologia. 2023;90(1):164-9.

Zhang X, Deng C, Liu W, Liu H, Zhou Y, Li Q, et al. Effects of varicocele and microsurgical varicocelectomy on the metabolites in semen. Sci Rep. 2022;12(1):5179.

Mahdi M, Majzoub A, Khalafalla K, To J, Aviles-Sandoval M, Elbardisi H, et al. Effect of redo varicocelectomy on semen parameters and pregnancy outcome: An original report and meta-analysis. Andrologia. 2022;54(10):e14525.

Downloads

Published

2025-11-12