MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7112508032

Beyond Tying Knots: Can Venous Bypass Shape the Future of Testicular Hemodynamics in Varicocele Treatment? – A Systematic Review

2025· article· en· W7112508032 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDove Medical Press (Taylor and Francis Group) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVascular anomalies and interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVaricoceleShuntingLigationSpermatic VeinVeinTesticular arteryAnastomosisSemen quality
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Albert Ciam, Ricky Adriansjah Urology Department, Hasan Sadikin Academic Medical Center, Universitas Padjajaran, Bandung, IndonesiaCorrespondence: Ricky Adriansjah, Urology Department, Hasan Sadikin Academic Medical Center, Universitas Padjadjaran, Jl. Prof. Eyckman No. 38, Bandung, West Java, 40161, Indonesia, Tel +62 811-2296-136, Email ricky.adriansjah@unpad.ac.idPurpose: Varicocele, present in 15– 20% of males and linked to 35– 40% of primary infertility, is commonly treated with microsurgical ligation. This review compares venous shunting techniques such as spermatic-inferior epigastric vein anastomosis with ligation in terms of efficacy, safety, and clinical outcomes, especially in complex cases like recurrence or Nutcracker Syndrome.Methods: We included randomized, prospective, retrospective, and cohort studies comparing venous shunting (eg, spermatic-inferior epigastric vein anastomosis) with ligation or without control group. We searched PubMed, EBSCO, ProQuest, EMBASE, and Scopus on 31 April 2025. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and JBI (Joanna Briggs Institute) for case series. Outcomes assessed included operative time, semen parameters, hormonal levels, recurrence, and complications. This study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD420251060842).Results: Twelve studies (n = 420 patients) were included. Shunting demonstrated improvements in semen quality (eg, sperm motility: 59.4% vs 41.6% post-ligation) and lower recurrence rates (0– 5% vs 5– 15%). However, operative times were longer (99– 146 vs 48– 92 minutes). Shunting also showed benefits in vascular parameters and testicular volume, particularly in NCS-associated cases. Complications were rare, with minor issues like scrotal edema reported.Conclusion: Venous shunting shows promise as an alternative in selected varicocele patients, with potential benefits in semen motility, pain relief, and recurrence reduction. However, the current evidence is limited, heterogeneous, and largely non-randomized. Shunting should therefore be considered experimental, requiring advanced microsurgical expertise, and further high-quality trials are needed before incorporation into standard guidelines.Keywords: varicocele, venous bypass, microsurgical anastomosis, male infertility

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.006
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.261 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDove Medical Press (Taylor and Francis Group)Same topicVascular anomalies and interventionsFrench-language works237,207