INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: It is generally considered that artery sparing suprainguinal varicocelectomy is associated with a higher risk of persistence in comparison with the non-sparing (Palomo) procedure. Artery sparing is desirable in specific conditions. Based on our 21-year long experience, this study aims to describe technical details and standard steps of the procedure, leading to a comparatively low recurrence rate. MATERIAL AND METHOD: 336 patients, prospectively collected, who underwent laparoscopic lymphatic and artery-sparing microsurgical varicocelectomy as a primary operation between March 1999 and February 2020, were retrospectively evaluated. Patient age was 7-21.5 years (mean 15.4). The left side was involved in 313 (93.2%), both sides in 23 (6.8%) patients. In total 359 varicoceles were repaired, in which 281 cases were grade III, 65 grade II and 13 cases were grade I. The most common indications for surgery were left testicle hypotrophy, demonstrated in 167 (49.7%) patients, an abnormal spermiogram in 48 (14.2%), pain in 28 (8.3%) and bilateral involvement in 23 (6.8%) of patients. The technique has been standardized into four steps: early artery identification; peeling the network of small veins off the artery; peeling the lymphatic vessels off medium and large size veins and division of all veins; check of residual vascular bundle containing the artery and lymphatics only (video - Appendix A). Mean postoperative followup was 27.1 (range 0.5-174) months. Complications were recorded. Persistent varicocele was defined as clinically significant varicocele accompanied by renotesticular reflux on Doppler ultrasound. Ultrasound was used to rule out hydrocele formation and testicular atrophy. RESULTS: Persistent varicocele was recorded in 15 of 359 (4.2%) cases; secondary hydrocele was detected in 1 case (0.3%). Testicular atrophy was not detected in any of the operated patients. Most complications were recorded in the first 3 years after the introduction of the method; 5 recurrences of 290 (1.7%) cases were detected over the last 18 years (Table). DISCUSSION: The method meets all requirements of subinguinal microscopic repair. The artery preservation is desirable in previous (and for future) inguinal and subinguinal surgery cases where collaterals could be compromised. Artery sparing allows for a future vasectomy. Boys with a varicocele on a solitary testicle may be good candidates for this procedure as well. We consider the method as alternative for experienced laparoscopic surgeons. CONLUSION: The laparoscopic lymphatic and artery sparing microsurgical varicocelectomy is safe and effective method with a low recurrence rate like the non-sparing suprainguinal repairs.

• Klíčová slova
• Adolescent, Postoperative complications, Recurrence, Testis, Varicocele,
• MeSH
• arterie MeSH
• dítě MeSH
• dospělí MeSH
• hydrokéla * chirurgie   MeSH
• laparoskopie * metody   MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• lymfatické cévy * chirurgie   MeSH
• mladiství MeSH
• mladý dospělý MeSH
• retrospektivní studie MeSH
• varikokéla * chirurgie   MeSH
• Check Tag
• dítě MeSH
• dospělí MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• mladiství MeSH
• mladý dospělý MeSH
• mužské pohlaví MeSH
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH
• práce podpořená grantem MeSH