4.3 Article

Transcatheter foam sclerotherapy of symptomatic female varicocele with sodium-tetradecyl-sulfate foam

期刊

CARDIOVASCULAR AND INTERVENTIONAL RADIOLOGY
卷 31, 期 4, 页码 778-784

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00270-007-9264-6

关键词

varicocele; pelvic congestion syndrome; sclerotherapy; venous reflux; dyspareunia; menstrual pain

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To evaluate the efficacy of transcatheter foam sclerotherapy (TCFS) in pelvic varicocele using sodium-tetradecyl-sulfate foam (STSF), we conducted a retrospective study in 38 patients (mean age, 36.9 years; range, 22-44 years) with pelvic congestion syndrome (PCS) treated between January 2000 and June 2005 by TCFS. Pelvic pain was associated with dyspareunia in 23 (60.5%) patients, urinary urgency in 9 (23.7%) patients, and worsening of pain during menstruation and at the end of a day of work in 7 (18.4%) and 38 (100%) patients, respectively. Diagnosis was made by pelvic and transvaginal color Doppler ultrasound examination, demonstrating ovarian or pelvic varices with a diameter > 5 mm presenting venous reflux. TCFS was performed in all patients, using 3% STSF. Follow-up was performed by physical examination, pelvic and transvaginal Doppler ultrasound examination and by a questionnaire-based assessment of pain at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after the procedure. Technical success was achieved in all patients (100%). In three patients a pelvic colic-like pain occurred immediately after sclerotic agent injection, disappearing spontaneously after a few minutes. No recurrent varicoceles were observed during a 12-month follow-up. A statistically significant improvement in each category of specific symptoms was observed at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after the procedure. We conclude that TCFS of female varicocele using a 3% STSF is safe and effective for the treatment of PCS. It is associated with a significant reduction of symptoms and can be regarded as a valid alternative to other endovascular and surgical techniques.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据