With the intensification of research in the realm of male reproductive health in recent years, varicocele has been recognized as one of the primary factors affecting male fertility. Although its clinical manifestations are diverse, accurate and effective diagnosis remains a pivotal step in determining therapeutic outcomes. Physical examination (PE) is extremely important in screening for varicocele; a worm-like varicose vein at the base of the scrotum can be seen in severe varicocele patients, and for mild to moderate varicocele patients, diagnosis can be made through palpation. However, a study showed that the accuracy of PE in diagnosing varicocele was 63.5%, and PE should be followed by CDU to increase diagnostic accuracy9. Scrotal ultrasound is a widely used modality for the diagnosis of varicoceles. Typical Doppler findings include venous flow at rest with intermittent or continuous flow reversal with Valsalva3. The Sarteschi and Dubin classifications are the most commonly used10,11. It is widely accepted that the progression of varicocele can lead to a decline in testicular spermatogenic function and in severe cases, even result in testicular atrophy, profoundly impairing the patient's reproductive capability12,13. Correspondingly, timely and precise early diagnosis combined with rational treatment can effectively counteract this decline in semen quality14.
While traditional supine imaging offers clinicians operational and procedural convenience, it has diagnostic limitations, especially when detecting right-sided or bilateral varicoceles, leading to potential misdiagnoses. Through our clinical observations, we found that in specific postures like the supine position, varicocele symptoms were not evident in the right spermatic vein of 1030 patients. For example, in Figure 3, the diameter of the spermatic vein is only 2 mm. However, when shifted to a standing position, these symptoms became markedly prominent (Figure 4 and Figure 6). Such diagnostic disparities induced by postural changes might be attributed to altered blood reflux and decreased intraluminal pressure in the supine posture, rendering the right varicose vein less noticeable. Furthermore, nearly all patients exhibited exacerbated varicocele severity when standing compared to the supine position. Utilizing a combined approach of supine and standing imaging not only enhances diagnostic accuracy but also aids in timely and effective assessment and treatment of varicocele, elevating the quality of medical services. This assists more patients in obtaining accurate early diagnosis and timely rational treatment, mitigating the fertility-threatening impact of the condition.
Simultaneously, contrast-enhanced ultrasound, as a technique for evaluating microvascular perfusion, has not yet been widely adopted in the diagnostic assessment of varicoceles. Conventional detection of varicocele reflux often employs color Doppler ultrasound, but this method has inherent limitations when assessing vascular reflux, particularly yielding false-negative results in scenarios of slow blood flow, thereby failing to accurately gauge the severity of varicocele. In contrast, using contrast agents, blood flow direction can be observed more clearly in contrast mode, and reflux timing can be discerned. The routine B-ultrasound phlebography for varicoceles mainly adopts the femoral vein route, which is more traumatic and less acceptable to patients. Therefore, we propose injecting the contrast agent from the left median cubital vein. This method is less invasive, more operationally convenient, and does not extend the imaging time, serving as a crucial supplementary examination for patients diagnosed with varicocele without detected reflux. This can effectively prevent erroneous evaluations of varicocele severity by physicians, which could impact subsequent treatment.
The key point of ultrasonic detection of varicocele is that the critical value of the inner diameter of the blood vessel is only for reference. The presence or absence of a reflux signal is an important basis for establishing the diagnosis. Therefore, for patients with a wider inner diameter, if no reflux is seen, further contrast-enhanced ultrasound should be performed. It takes a certain amount of time for the contrast agent to take effect, so the test cannot be performed immediately after the injection of the contrast agent. It is usually better to perform the test 5-10 min after the injection of the contrast agent. The limitation of this study is that the patient needs to change body position, so the detection time is longer compared to other methods. In addition to this, the use of contrast agents will increase medical costs.
In summary, compared to urogenital tract infections and epididymitis, the diagnosis and treatment of varicoceles appear more intricate. Nonetheless, with advancements in medical technology and research, novel diagnostic methods and treatment strategies continue to emerge, offering a broader therapeutic spectrum for patients. The combined imaging phlebography technique explored in this study can effectively avoid misdiagnoses and undeniably provides an innovative, progressive perspective for diagnosing varicoceles, also paving the way for future research and treatment directions.