@article{QIMS8173,
author = {Nicolas Favard and Morgan Moulin and Patricia Fauque and Aurélie Bertaut and Sylvain Favelier and Louis Estivalet and Frédéric Michel and Luc Cormier and Paul Sagot and Romaric Loffroy},
title = {Comparison of three different embolic materials for varicocele embolization: retrospective study of tolerance, radiation and recurrence rate},
journal = {Quantitative Imaging in Medicine and Surgery},
volume = {5},
number = {6},
year = {2015},
keywords = {},
abstract = {Background: To evaluate pain, radiation and recurrence rates in patients undergoing varicocele embolization with three different embolic materials.
Methods: Retrospective study of 182 consecutive patients who underwent transcatheter retrograde varicocele embolization from July 2011 to May 2015 with glue (Glubran®2) (group 1, n=63), mechanical agents (coils and/or plugs) (group 2, n=53) or a sclerosing agent (polidocanol) (group 3, n=66). Patients were asked by telephone interview to evaluate pain during embolization and at 1, 7 and 30 days using a quantitative pain scale ranging from 0 to 10. Duration of scopy, kinetic energy released per unit mass (kerma) and dose area product (DAP) were assessed as radiation parameters during embolization procedures. Recurrence rates after treatment were also evaluated. Statistical analyses were performed using parametric and non-parametric tests.
Results: Patients in the three study groups were comparable for age, clinical indication and embolization side. No difference was noted for significant pain (pain score ≥3) during embolization and at 1, 7 and 30 days after treatment. Discomfort (pain score },
issn = {2223-4306}, url = {https://qims.amegroups.org/article/view/8173}
}