See the published version of this preprint at BMC Surgery.
This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
Research article
zhengmian zhang
Fujian Medical University
Corresponding Author
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
Background
A retrospective comparative study was performed on scrotal incision, inguinal incision and laparoscopic orchidopexy. The characteristics of the different surgical methods were analysed.
Methods
Clinical data of 158 patients with inguinal cryptorchidism admitted to our hospital from January 2017 to January 2018 were retrospectively analysed.
Results
The operation time in the scrotal incision group was significantly less than that in the inguinal incision group and laparoscopic group (P < 0.05). The length of the operative incision in the scrotal incision group and laparoscopic incision group was shorter than that in the inguinal incision group. There was no significant difference in the postoperative hospitalisation time or hospitalisation cost among the three groups (P > 0.05). The incidence of scrotal haematoma in the scrotal incision group was significantly higher than that in the inguinal incision group and laparoscopic group. There were no complications, such as testicular atrophy, testicular retraction, indirect inguinal hernia, or hydrocele.
Conclusions
Transscrotal incision, transinguinal incision and laparoscopic orchidopexy are safe for the treatment of inguinal cryptorchidism. Satisfactory early clinical results can be achieved. Rational use of scrotal incision surgery and laparoscopic surgery for cryptorchidism may replace transinguinal surgery and can provide a good cosmetic effect for children.
Keywords
Transscrotal incision, Inguinal incision, Laparoscopy, Orchidopex
Loading...
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Published
View the published article at BMC Surgery.
No community comments so far
Editorial decision: Accept
On 10 Dec, 2020
Editor assigned
On 08 Dec, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 08 Dec, 2020
Editor invited
On 08 Dec, 2020
No comments provided
Editor assigned
On 12 Nov, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 12 Nov, 2020
Editor invited
On 12 Nov, 2020
No comments provided
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 26 Oct, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 23 Oct, 2020
Editor assigned
On 20 Oct, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 19 Oct, 2020
Editor invited
On 19 Oct, 2020
Version 1
Posted 29 Jun, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 07 Aug, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 31 Jul, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 28 Jul, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 10 Jul, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 07 Jul, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 06 Jul, 2020
Editor assigned
On 23 Jun, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 22 Jun, 2020
Editor invited
On 22 Jun, 2020
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Subject Areas
General Surgery
Learn more about our company.
See the published version of this preprint at BMC Surgery.
This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
Research article
zhengmian zhang
Fujian Medical University
Corresponding Author
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Published
View the published article at BMC Surgery.
No community comments so far
Editorial decision: Accept
On 10 Dec, 2020
Editor assigned
On 08 Dec, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 08 Dec, 2020
Editor invited
On 08 Dec, 2020
No comments provided
Editor assigned
On 12 Nov, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 12 Nov, 2020
Editor invited
On 12 Nov, 2020
No comments provided
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 26 Oct, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 23 Oct, 2020
Editor assigned
On 20 Oct, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 19 Oct, 2020
Editor invited
On 19 Oct, 2020
Version 1
Posted 29 Jun, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 07 Aug, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 31 Jul, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 28 Jul, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 10 Jul, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 07 Jul, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 06 Jul, 2020
Editor assigned
On 23 Jun, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 22 Jun, 2020
Editor invited
On 22 Jun, 2020
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Subject Areas
General Surgery
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
View the published article at BMC Surgery.
Background
A retrospective comparative study was performed on scrotal incision, inguinal incision and laparoscopic orchidopexy. The characteristics of the different surgical methods were analysed.
Methods
Clinical data of 158 patients with inguinal cryptorchidism admitted to our hospital from January 2017 to January 2018 were retrospectively analysed.
Results
The operation time in the scrotal incision group was significantly less than that in the inguinal incision group and laparoscopic group (P < 0.05). The length of the operative incision in the scrotal incision group and laparoscopic incision group was shorter than that in the inguinal incision group. There was no significant difference in the postoperative hospitalisation time or hospitalisation cost among the three groups (P > 0.05). The incidence of scrotal haematoma in the scrotal incision group was significantly higher than that in the inguinal incision group and laparoscopic group. There were no complications, such as testicular atrophy, testicular retraction, indirect inguinal hernia, or hydrocele.
Conclusions
Transscrotal incision, transinguinal incision and laparoscopic orchidopexy are safe for the treatment of inguinal cryptorchidism. Satisfactory early clinical results can be achieved. Rational use of scrotal incision surgery and laparoscopic surgery for cryptorchidism may replace transinguinal surgery and can provide a good cosmetic effect for children.
Loading...