A novel method of bilateral patent processus vaginalis ligation in transumbilical single-site multiport laparoscopic orchiopexy

Advantages of single-site laparoscopic orchiopexy for palpable undescended testes in children: a prospective comparison study

PURPOSE

To evaluate the feasibility of single-site laparoscopic orchiopexy for palpable undescended testes in children.

METHODS

We prospectively studied patients with undescended testes between July 2021 and June 2022. In total, 223 patients were included in our study: 105 underwent single-site laparoscopic orchiopexy and 118 underwent conventional laparoscopic orchiopexy. During single-site laparoscopic orchiopexy, 3 ports were inserted within the umbilicus.

RESULTS

No differences were observed between the groups in terms of age and laterality. For unilateral undescended testes, the operating time was longer in the single site group than in the conventional group at the early stages (55.31 ± 12.04 min vs. 48.14 ± 14.39 min, P = 0.007), but it was similar to the conventional group at the later stages (48.82 ± 13.49 min vs. 48.14 ± 14.39 min, P = 0.78). Testicular ascent occurred in one patient from each group. There was no significant difference in the success rate between the single-site group and the conventional group (99.0% vs. 99.2%, P = 0.93). In the single-site group, no visible abdominal scarring was observed, while in the conventional group, there were two noticeable scars on the abdomen.

CONCLUSION

Single-site laparoscopic orchiopexy offers superior cosmetic results and comparable success rates compared to conventional laparoscopic orchiopexy for palpable undescended testes.

Comparison of clinical outcomes between laparoscopic orchiopexy and open orchiopexy in the treatment of palpable undescended testes

Objective

To compare the clinical effects of laparoscopic orchiopexy (LO) and open orchiopexy (OO) in the treatment of palpable undescended testes.

Methods

Seventy-six children with palpable undescended testes treated in Zaozhuang Municipal Hospital from June 2019 to January 2021 were selected in this observational retrospective study. Patients were grouped according to their different surgical methods, 33 patients received OO (Open-group) and 43 patients received LO (Laparoscopic-group). The clinical outcomes of the two groups were compared, including surgical-related indicators, near and long-term surgical complications and postoperative testicular growth.

Results

Operation time, intraoperative bleeding, first ambulation time and hospitalization time in the Laparoscopic-group were lower than those in the Open-group (p<0.05). The short-term complication rate in the Laparoscopic-group was lower than that in the Open-group (2.27% vs 15.15%; p<0.05), but the long-term complication rate in the Laparoscopic-group was not significantly different from the Open-group (4.65% vs 3.03%; p>0.05). Follow-up was up to 18 months post-operation, with the rate of testicular growth (97.67% vs 96.97%; p>0.05) and testicular volume (0.59 ± 0.14ml vs 0.58 ± 0.12ml p>0.05) not significantly different between the Laparoscopic-group or Open-group respectively.

Conclusion

LO is as clinically effective as OO in the treatment of palpable undescended testes, however, shorter operation time, less intraoperative bleeding and rapid recovery time have been noted with LO.