Authors David Chung University of Manitoba Suvig Dua University of Manitoba Dhiraj Bal University of Manitoba Harliv Dhillon Men’s Health Clinic, Winnipeg, MB Premal Patel University of Manitoba DOI: https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.8701 Keywords: epididymitis, chronic epididymitis, epididymectomy Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Despite being a commonly encountered urologic condition, there remains a paucity of understanding and literature on the management and natural history of isolated epididymal pain. Typically, patients who do not respond to conservative management undergo an epididymectomy; however, the literature on its efficacy is also scarce, with success rates varying from 10–90%. Our goal was to better describe the etiology and natural history of isolated epididymal pain and to describe the rates of success associated with epididymectomy.

METHODS: A retrospective, case-control study was conducted at the Manitoba Men’s Health Clinic, with the approval of the University of Manitoba Research Ethics Board. All patients presenting with chronic epididymitis, defined as discomfort or pain localized to the epididymis for at least three months, were identified. Information regarding patient demographics, past medical and surgical history, duration of pain, localization of pain, findings on previous ultrasounds, prior conservative therapies trialed, and response rates, as well as response rates to surgical therapy were collected.

RESULTS: From April 2022 to April 2023, a total of 275 patients with chronic orchialgia were identified; among them, 74 patients presented with chronic isolated epididymal pain. On average, 22.9% of patients experienced symptoms for 3–6 months, 10% for 6–12 months, and 67.1% for over 12 months; 13.5% (n=10) had associated ejaculatory pain, 8.1% (n=6) had lower urinary tract symptoms, and 4.1% (n=3) had erectile dysfunction. Ultrasound findings were observed in 68.9% of patients, with 31.1% having an epididymal cyst, 27.1% having a varicocele, 5.4% having a spermatocele, and 4.1% having a hydrocele. Among those who underwent conservative therapy, only 36.2% of patients reported a positive response. Surgical intervention was performed on 23 patients, including 16 who underwent epididymectomy, three who underwent cord denervation, and two who underwent vasovasostomy and spermatocelectomy each. Most (81.3%, n=13) patients who underwent epididymectomy had a positive response to the surgical intervention, defined as no pain on followup, while all patients undergoing other surgical interventions experienced a positive response.

CONCLUSIONS: Chronic epididymal pain is a condition with limited data surrounding its management. Prior to referral, a large proportion of patients did not undergo any conservative treatment, and of those that did, there was limited response. For those who underwent surgical intervention, all were pain-free on followup, except three patients who underwent epididymectomy.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

How to Cite

Chung, D., Dua, S., Bal, D., Dhillon, H. . ., & Patel, P. (2024). Outcomes after chronic isolated epididymal pain: A retrospective study. Canadian Urological Association Journal, 18(6), 165–8. https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.8701

Issue Section

Original Research

License

You, the Author(s), assign your copyright in and to the Article to the Canadian Urological Association. This means that you may not, without the prior written permission of the CUA:

Post the Article on any Web site Translate or authorize a translation of the Article Copy or otherwise reproduce the Article, in any format, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so Copy or otherwise reproduce portions of the Article, including tables and figures, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so.

The CUA encourages use for non-commercial educational purposes and will not unreasonably deny any such permission request.

You retain your moral rights in and to the Article. This means that the CUA may not assert its copyright in such a way that would negatively reflect on your reputation or your right to be associated with the Article.

The CUA also requires you to warrant the following:

That you are the Author(s) and sole owner(s), that the Article is original and unpublished and that you have not previously assigned copyright or granted a licence to any other third party; That all individuals who have made a substantive contribution to the article are acknowledged; That the Article does not infringe any proprietary right of any third party and that you have received the permissions necessary to include the work of others in the Article; and That the Article does not libel or violate the privacy rights of any third party.