Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40696263›Full record

ArticleCVIR endovascular2025

A fifteen-year retrospective analysis of varicocele embolization: evaluating success, recurrence rates and embolic agents.

Meadhbh Ni Mhiochain de Grae, Maha Al-Khattab, Amor Alkadhimi, Maia Springael, Gerry O'Sullivan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in CVIR endovascular, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Meadhbh Ni Mhiochain de GraeDepartment of Interventional Radiology, Galway University Hospital, Galway, Ireland. meadhbhnimhioch24@rcsi.ie.
Maha Al-KhattabDepartment of Interventional Radiology, Galway University Hospital, Galway, Ireland.
Amor AlkadhimiTallaght University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
Maia SpringaelTallaght University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
Gerry O'SullivanDepartment of Interventional Radiology, Galway University Hospital, Galway, Ireland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionA varicocele is a venous dilatation due to valvular incompetence within the pampiniform plexus, affecting 10-20% of the population and found in 40% of men with primary infertility (Hum Reprod Update 7(1):59-64, 2001, Cochrane Database System Rev (3), 2004, Curr Urol 6(1):33-6, 2012, World J Men's Health 37(1):4, 2019). Varicocele associated pain occurs in 2-10% of cases (Hum Reprod Update 7(1):59-64, 2001, SpringerPlus 4:1-5, 2015). Treatment options include conservative management, percutaneous embolization, or surgery (Urology 72(1):77-80, 2008). In the literature, percutaneous embolization has a technical failure rate ranging from 0 to 13.9% and recurrence rates of around 13% (Cochrane Database System Rev 4(4):CD000479, 2021). This study evaluates the success and recurrence of percutaneous varicocele embolizations over fifteen years and compares the embolic materials used.

methodsThis was a retrospective study of all adult patients who underwent varicocele embolization performed from April 2008 to February 2023 in two tertiary centres. Data collected included patient age, procedure date, access site, side of occurrence, previous interventions, treatment method, need for re-intervention, and recurrence rates. We defined technical success as successful access to the gonadal vein and embolization of same with coil/sclerosant. We assessed clinical success through follow-up telephone consultations and ultrasound.

resultsThe technical and clinical success rate was 96% and 93.75%, respectively. Of 225 patients, 3.12% had prior failed surgeries, all were treated successfully with IR, and only 0.89% required further surgical intervention. Patients reported recurrence rate of 25% of cases during telephone follow-up. However, the confirmed actual recurrence rate based on ultrasound was only 6.25%. The complication rate was low (1.78%), with no major events. Among patients treated for subfertility, 51.35% achieved successful conception following percutaneous embolization. Outcomes did not significantly differ based on the type of embolic material used.

conclusionPercutaneous embolization is a safe, effective, and durable treatment for varicocele, demonstrating high technical and clinical success regardless of embolic material used with a low recurrence rate over long-term follow-up. It remains effective even in cases of prior failed surgical repair and is associated with promising fertility outcomes. These findings support embolization as a first-line treatment in varicocele management.

Indexed as

EmbolizationFertilityInfertilityInterventionalMalePercutaneous proceduresRadiologyRecurrenceSclerosing solutionsTreatment outcomeVaricoceleVascular surgical procedures

Identifiers

PMID40696263
PMCPMC12283497

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.