Objective: The diameters of the veins in the pampiniform plexus have been used to diagnose subclinical varicocele. But there are many cutoff points and some controversies about the diagnosis. These cause difficulty in the evaluation of the results of epidemiological and clinical studies. Our aim is to establish the reliability of vein diameters in the pampiniform plexus in the diagnosis of subclinical varicocele. Methods: Physical examination, scrotal gray scale ultrasonography (SU) and color Doppler ultrasonography (CDU) were performed to assess varicocele in 100 infertile patients without clinical varicocele (group I), 100 infertile patients with clinical left varicocele (group II), and 50 fertile men without clinical varicocele (group III) as a control group. The diameter of the veins in the pampiniform plexus was measured with SU. According to various cutoff points of venous diameter and CDU criteria, the diagnosis of varicocele was made. The highest mean venous diameters were calculated with and without varicocele in men whose diagnoses had been made with CDU. The results were correlated with each other and the control group. Results: According to venous diameter cutoff points, the varicocele ratio did not correlate with the CDU results (p < 0.05) except for the left side of patients with clinical left-sided varicocele. The highest mean diameters of the veins in group III (control group) did not show a significant difference to the other groups (p > 0.05) except for the left side of group II patients. We did not find an exact relation between the highest venous diameter in the men who have and those who do not have subclinical varicocele with CDU. The highest mean diameter was 2.17 ± 0.34 (SD) mm for men who have subclinical varicocele and 2.00 ± 0.31 mm for men who do not have subclinical varicocele by CDU (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Our results indicate that venous diameters should not be used as diagnostic criteria for subclinical varicocele. Only the evaluation of venous diameter in varicocele should be used to document and quantify pathology, but it should not be used to establish the diagnosis.

This content is only available via PDF.
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.