Background: Varicocele has been found to impair the function of the epididymis resulting in subfertility whereas the varicocelectomy can resolve the phenomenon. L-carnitine is regarded as a biomarker for the function of the epididymis and has been found in reduced concentrations in infertile patients of various causes, including infertile men with varicocele. It seems that Lcarnitine and varicocele share clinical significance and the area of research looks promising. Objective: To identify the role of L-carnitine in the treatment of varicocele. Materials and methods: A systematic search was performed in Pubmed/Medline with the terms (L-carnitine) and (varicocele) and (L-carnitine) and (varicocelectomy). Inclusion criteria were studies reported outcomes of L-carnitine administration alone or in duet, as primary or adjuvant treatment to varicocele. Exclusion criteria were non-English language and animal studies. Studies using L-carnitine as part of a panel of therapeutic agents were avoided. Results: Only four suitable studies were identified for discussion. In one randomized study, the combination of L-carnitine and cinnoxicam improved semen parameters in patients with non-high-grade varicocele compared to L-carnitine alone and had a favourable effect on pregnancy rates but the effect of grade is unknown. In another study, as an adjuvant treatment to varicocelectomy, L-carnitine showed no clear benefit. Finally, in comparison to surgery, the results are inconclusive; two studies showed some benefit might be expected in low-grade or subclinical varicocele, but surgery appears superior. Conclusions: The evidence regarding the role of L-carnitine as a primary or adjuvant treatment of varicocele is sparse. The pathophysiological significance of L-carnitine implicates a potential role of the molecule in the management of varicocele, but the evidence so far is controversial for any recommendations. L-carnitine might be taken into consideration in selected cases; however, further search is needed in order the optimal role of L-carnitine in infertile patients with varicocele to be clarified.

Objective: To investigate the usage and the efficacy of vitamins as primary or adjuvant treatment in infertile men with varicocele. Methods: A systematic search in PubMed, the Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE) and Cochrane Library with the terms (varicocele) AND (vitamins) was performed. We searched for studies: a) reporting the administration of vitamins (individually or as part of a complex) in men with varicocele and infertility, b) primarily or adjuvant to invasive treatment, and c) reporting the impact on semen parameters and/or pregnancy rates. Exclusion criteria were animal, adolescent and non-English studies, grey literature and trials reporting abstracts only. Results: Seven studies were identified eligible for qualitative analysis. All studies were randomised except one (case series). Vitamins were administered dominantly as part of antioxidant complex and only two studies used vitamins (C and E, respectively) as sole agent. In two studies, vitamin monotherapy resulted in improvement in semen quality, but the effect on pregnancy rates is unknown. One study reported no efficacy of adjuvant multivitamin treatment after embolisation in terms of both semen quality and pregnancy rates. Finally, four studies reported a positive effect of vitamins on semen parameters after varicocelectomy, but the effect on pregnancy rates is conflicting; one study reported improved pregnancy rates with adjuvant treatment, two studies did not evaluate the pregnancy rates, and in one study the outcome was unclear due to missing data. Conclusions: Vitamins have been used mostly as part of an antioxidant panel for the management of infertile men with varicocele. Most studies have found a positive impact on semen parameters in selected men with varicocele and infertility, as primary or adjuvant treatment. However, the clinical benefit of vitamins administration on pregnancy rate is under-evaluated and should be the target of future research.

No abstract

No abstract

Objective: The increasing use of scrotal ultrasonography (US) for non-cancerous indications has led to greater detection of incidental, small testicular masses. Operative intervention is currently the mainstay of treatment for all testicular tumours; however, despite the low malignant potential of small, incidental masses, little is known about conservative management using radiological surveillance. Methods: A systematic review using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines was conducted and studies meeting the inclusion criteria were reviewed for patient outcomes. Results: A total of 293 patients across six studies underwent radiological surveillance for an incidental small testicular mass. Infertility was the main indication for investigation and all studies used US as the surveillance modality. A total of 37 patients (12.6%) underwent surgical exploration during follow-up, with only 10 (3.4%) found to have malignant disease at histology. Conclusions: Radiological surveillance of incidental small testicular masses is safe when used for select patient groups due to the high probability of benign disease, although optimal patient selection criteria and a well-defined protocol are lacking. This approach could be considered in patients with incidental, impalpable testicular masses of ≤5 mm in diameter displaying no significant size increase or internal vascularity on US and with negative tumour markers, as the probability of malignancy in these patients is low.