Abstract:Varicoceles are associated with male subfertility; however, the mechanisms by which varicoceles affect fertility have yet to be satisfactorily explained. Several treatment options exist, including surgical or radiological treatment, however the safest and most efficient treatment remains unclear. To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of surgical and radiological treatment of varicoceles on live birth rate, adverse events, pregnancy rate, varicocele recurrence, and quality of life amongst couples where the adult male has a varicocele, and the female partner of childbearing age has no fertility problems. We searched the following databases on 4 April 2020: the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL. We also searched the trial registries and reference lists of articles. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) if they were relevant to the clinical question posed and compared different forms of surgical ligation, different forms of radiological treatments, surgical treatment compared to radiological treatment, or one of these aforementioned treatment forms compared to non‐surgical methods, delayed treatment, or no treatment. We extracted data if the studies reported on live birth, adverse events, pregnancy, varicocele recurrence, and quality of life. Screening of abstracts and full‐text publications, alongside data extraction and 'Risk of bias' assessment, were done dually using the Covidence software. When we had sufficient data, we calculated random‐effects (Mantel‐Haenszel) meta‐analyses; otherwise, we reported results narratively. We used the I 2 statistic to analyse statistical heterogeneity. We planned to use funnel plots to assess publication bias in meta‐analyses with at least 10 included studies. We dually rated the risk of bias of studies using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool, and the certainty of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach. We identified 1897 citations after de‐duplicating the search results. We excluded 1773 during title and abstract screening. From the 113 new full texts assessed in addition to the 10 studies (11 references) included in the previous version of this review, we included 38 new studies, resulting in a total of 48 studies (59 references) in the review providing data for 5384 participants. Two studies (three references) are ongoing studies and two studies are awaiting classification. Treatment versus non‐surgical, non‐radiological, delayed, or no treatment Two studies comparing surgical or radiological treatment versus no treatment reported on live birth with differing directions of effect. As a result, we are uncertain whether surgical or radiological treatment improves live birth rates when compared to no treatment (risk ratio (RR) 2.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.19 to 26.93; 2 RCTs, N = 204; I 2 = 74%, very low‐certainty evidence). Treatment may improve pregnancy rates compared to delayed or no treatment (RR 1.55, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.26; 13 RCTs, N = 1193; I 2 = 65%, low‐certainty evidence). This suggests that couples with no or delayed treatment have a 21% chance of pregnancy, whilst the pregnancy rate after surgical or radiological treatment is between 22% and 48%. We identified no evidence on adverse events, varicocele recurrence, or quality of life for this comparison. Surgical versus radiological treatment We are uncertain about the effect of surgical versus radiological treatment on live birth and on the following adverse events: hydrocele formation, pain, epididymitis, haematoma, and suture granuloma. We are uncertain about the effect of surgical versus radiological treatment on pregnancy rate (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.70; 5 RCTs, N = 456, low‐certainty evidence) and varicocele recurrence (RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.82 to 2.08; 3 RCTs, N = 380, low‐certainty evidence). We identified no evidence on quality of life for this comparison. Surgery versus other surgical treatment We identified 19 studies comparing microscopic subinguinal surgical treatment to any other surgical treatment. Microscopic subinguinal surgical treatment probably improves pregnancy rates slightly compared to other surgical treatments (RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.36; 12 RCTs, N = 1473, moderate‐certainty evidence). This suggests that couples with microscopic subinguinal surgical treatment have a 10% to 14% chance of pregnancy after treatment, whilst the pregnancy rate in couples after other surgical treatments is 10%. This procedure also probably reduces the risk of varicocele recurrence (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.29, 0.79; 14 RCTs, N = 1565, moderate‐certainty evidence). This suggests that 0.4% to 1.1% of men undergoing microscopic subinguinal surgical treatment experience recurrent varicocele, whilst 1.4% of men undergoing other surgical treatments do. Results for the following adverse events were inconclus -Abstract Truncated-

Treatment of male varicoceles by transcatheter polidocanol foam sclerotherapy: evaluation of clinical success, complications, and patients’ satisfaction with regard to alternative techniques

Polidocanol-foam treatment of varicose veins: Quality-of-life impact compared to conventional surgery

Impact of treatment of varicose veins with polidocanol foam compared to conventional surgery on quality of life

Treatment of Symptomatic High-Flow Female Varicoceles with Stop-flow Foam Sclerotherapy

Percutaneous Sclerotherapy with Polidocanol under the Guidance of Ultrasound for Venous Malformations in Children – A Retrospective Cohort Study from a Single Tertiary Medical Center

Interim Results of Bleomycin-Polidocanol Foam Sclerotherapy As a Highly Efficient Technique for Venous Malformations.

Fluoroscopy-guided foam sclerotherapy for varicose veins in the legs: a retrospective cohort analysis with long-term follow-up

Selective sclerotherapy of the internal spermatic vein in patients with varicoceles

Comparison Between Varicocelectomy and Varicocele Sclerotherapy: Results of a Single-Center Observational Study

Sclerosis and varicocele embolization with N-butyl cyanoacrylate: experience in 41 patients

First registry of patients treated with foam sclerotherapy using a new automated microfoam preparation device (2021-2022)

Safety and effectiveness of percutaneous sclerotherapy for venous disorders of the labia majora in patients with vascular malformations

Efficacy and Safety of Sclerotherapy with Polidocanol Foam for Superficial Venous Malformation

Percutaneous Sclerotherapy of Large Venous Malformations Using Consecutive Polidocanol and Bleomycin Foam: MR Imaging Volumetric and Quality-of-Life Assessment

Surgical or radiological treatment for varicoceles in subfertile men.

Comparison of polidocanol foam versus bleomycin polidocanol foam for treatment of venous malformations

Sclerotherapy with Polidocanol Foam is a Promising Perspective Treatment for Pyogenic Granuloma: A Retrospective Analysis in 52 Cases

[Surgical treatment of varicocele. Our experience in the last 10 years]

[Sclerotherapy of female varicocele]

Combination of High Ligation and Intraoperative Embolization using Polidocanol for Treatment of Varicoceles

Successful Sclerotherapy for Cervicofacial Macrocystic Lymphatic Malformations Using Polidocanol and Pingyangmycin Combined Foam Sclerosants