Open Versus Laparoscopic Gubernaculum-Sparing Second-Stage Fowler-Stephens Orchiopexy for Intra-Abdominal Testis: A Long-Term Study.

Abstract

Background:The benefits of performing open versus laparoscopic gubernaculum-sparing second-stage Fowler–Stephens orchiopexy (FSO) remain unclear. We compared the two techniques to answer this question.Methods:We retrospectively studied a cohort of patients who underwent laparoscopic first-stage FSO and open versus laparoscopic gubernaculum-sparing second-stage FSO at our institution between September 2004 and June 2020 (all patients underwent surgery by a single surgeon). We evaluated both procedures based on the incidence of testicular atrophy, testicular ascent, and other complications.Results:The age at initial surgery was 45.7 ± 28.2 months (median, 39). One hundred nine cases were treated with open second-stage gubernaculum-sparing FSO (OFSO), and 96 cases were treated with laparoscopic second-stage gubernaculum-sparing FSO (LFSO). The mean follow-up period was 59.8 months (median, 54; standard deviation, +35). The overall testicular atrophy rate was 1.5%. Atrophy was observed in 2 and 1 patient in the OFSO and LFSO groups, respectively (1.8% versus 1.0%, P > .05). There was no significant difference in the incidence of testicular ascent between both groups (2.8% versus 3.1%). Five and four complications were noted in the OFSO and LFSO groups, respectively (P > .05).Conclusions:Second-stage gubernaculum-sparing FSO achieved high testicular survival rates and satisfactory testicular positions. Neither the open nor laparoscopic approach appeared superior, because the overall testicular survival rates and incidence of testicular ascent and other complications were equivalent between both groups.