DOI 10.1016/j.juro.2009.06.020
Long-term outcome of epididymectomy for the management of chronic epididymal pain.
Аннотация
PURPOSE: We evaluated the long-term outcomes of patients who underwent epididymectomy for the treatment of chronic epididymal pain.
MATERIALS AND
METHODS
All 72 patients who underwent epididymectomy at our institution between 1994 and 2007 were invited to participate in the study. Patients were mailed questionnaires covering various aspects of the treatment. Questions regarding pain were rated on a scale between 0 and 10 (0--no pain, 10--severe pain). Patients who did not return the questionnaires were followed up by telephone and the medical case notes of all respondents were reviewed. Statistical analysis was performed using the Wilcoxon signed-rank and Fisher's exact tests with p <0.05 considered statistically significant.
RESULTS
A total of 53 patients participated (74% response rate) and mean followup was 7.4 years. Of these patients 45 (84.9%) underwent epididymectomy for post-vasectomy pain and the remainder (8 of 53, 15.1%) had the procedure for various nonvasectomy reasons. There were significant improvements in pain score in the post-vasectomy (mean 7.3 preoperative to 2.4 postoperative, p <0.001) and nonvasectomy (mean 7 preoperative to 2.8 postoperative, p = 0.002) groups. Of the patients in the post-vasectomy group 93.3% (42 of 45) had less or no pain postoperatively compared to 75% (6 of 8) in the nonvasectomy group. The satisfaction rate with epididymectomy was also higher in the post-vasectomy (42 of 45, 93.3%) compared to the nonvasectomy (5 of 8, 62.5%) group (p = 0.038).
CONCLUSIONS
With high patient satisfaction and a favorable long-term outcome epididymectomy appears to be an effective treatment option particularly for post-vasectomy chronic epididymal pain.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.