AJR Get Involved! Join ARRS Today
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gonda, R.
Right arrow Articles by O'Donnell, K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Gonda, R., Jr
Right arrow Articles by O'Donnell, K.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol 148, Issue 1, 71-75
Copyright © 1987 by American Roentgen Ray Society


Articles

Diagnosis of subclinical varicocele in infertility

RL Gonda Jr, JJ Karo, RA Forte, and KT O'Donnell

The clinically obvious varicocele is perhaps the most common identifiable and correctable cause of male infertility. However, less is known about the subclinical (not palpable) varicocele and its relationship to infertility. We undertook this study to compare the ability of high-resolution sonography and radionuclide scrotal scanning to detect subclinical varicocele. Fifty patients who were referred to our department with a diagnosis of infertility, an abnormal semen analysis, and a normal physical examination of the scrotum underwent both sonography and nuclear scanning. The final study group included 20 men who agreed to surgical ligation of the spermatic vein(s) after a positive sonographic and/or radionuclide study. Sonography was considered positive for subclinical varicocele in 95% of patients, while nuclear scanning was considered positive in only 55%. Postoperatively, all patients showed improvement in their semen and 40% (eight patients) became fertile. Subclinical varicocele seems to be an important causal factor in infertility and, in our experience, high-resolution sonography is superior to radionuclide scanning in its diagnosis.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
RadioGraphicsHome page
P. J. Woodward, C. M. Schwab, and I. A. Sesterhenn
From the Archives of the AFIP: Extratesticular Scrotal Masses: Radiologic-Pathologic Correlation
RadioGraphics, January 1, 2003; 23(1): 215 - 240.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
ImagingHome page
S R Keoghane and J E Kabala
Varicocele embolisation
Imaging, April 1, 2001; 13(1): 11 - 17.
[Full Text]


Home page
Journal of Diagnostic Medical SonographyHome page
R. B. Meacham and D. J. May
The Use of Ultrasonograhy in the Evaluation and Management of Male Infertility
Journal of Diagnostic Medical Sonography, May 1, 1996; 12(3): 119 - 126.
[Abstract] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1987 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.