Varicocele presents a relatively high prevalence in infertile men of reproductive age, reaching 35%-44%6. The impact of this disease on male fertility cannot be overlooked, as it may lead to imbalances in testicular function, instability in blood supply, and thermoregulatory disturbances, subsequently affecting both the quality and quantity of sperm. More severe consequences include potential testicular atrophy and other related complications. Numerous studies have proved the effects of varicocele repair on semen parameters7, pregnancy outcomes8, and reproductive hormones. Besides in infertile patients, varicocelectomy is also performed in adolescent patients with chronic testicular pain and/or testicular growth arrest. Laparoscopic varicocelectomy is the widely accepted method, but hydrocele is a common complication10.
In recent years, microsurgical varicocelectomy has gradually become the "gold standard" treatment for varicocele11. Compared to traditional treatments, this technique has obvious advantages, including fewer postoperative complications, a lower recurrence rate, minimal invasiveness, and rapid postoperative recovery12,13,14. However, many physicians still opt to perform this surgery under general anesthesia. The application of general anesthesia requires patients to fast preoperatively, resulting in a longer postoperative recovery, and the potential drop in arterial blood pressure during anesthesia can increase the difficulty in isolating and protecting the spermatic artery during surgery.
Given these challenges, this study proposes and practices a microsurgical varicocelectomy technique under local anesthesia. The implementation of this method only requires two applications of compound lidocaine cream in the ward for epidermal anesthesia, followed by infiltrative anesthesia in the operating room. This new technique significantly shortens the required surgery time, avoids the complexities and risks of general anesthesia, and offers new surgical opportunities for patients with cardiopulmonary issues who cannot undergo general anesthesia. Furthermore, under local anesthesia, the surgeon can more clearly observe the pulsations of the spermatic artery, enabling more precise isolation and protection. This not only effectively reduces surgical risks but also genuinely promotes the widespread adoption of the surgical technique.
The local anesthesia used in this study also reflects a more patient-centered care approach, reducing postoperative discomfort and economic burden. Postoperative follow-up data indicate that, three months after the surgery, the patient's semen quality had significantly improved. However, there are limitations to this technique. Patients might still feel a pulling sensation during the surgery, which could potentially impact its completion. Additionally, this study did not directly compare with the traditional microsurgical varicocelectomy technique, representing another significant limitation. Furthermore, the limitations of this surgery require good patient cooperation, making it unsuitable for children under the age of 14 who cannot cooperate. Nonetheless, with further research and practice, this technique will gain broader acceptance and application.
In conclusion, microsurgical varicocelectomy under local anesthesia provides a new perspective for the treatment of varicocele, showcasing its potential value and advantages. In the future, with continued research and technological advancement, this technique holds promise to bring improved therapeutic outcomes and a higher quality of life for more varicocele patients.