To the editor,

Dear editor, we would like to discuss on the article on “Minimal hydrocelectomy with the aid of scrotoscope (¹1 Bin Y, Yong-Bao W, Zhuo Y, Jin-Rui Y. Minimal hydrocelectomy with the aid of scrotoscope: a ten-year experience. Int Braz J Urol. 2014;40:384-9.)”. Bin et al. concluded that “the combination of minimal hydrocelectomy and scrotoscopy seems to be an encouraging technique (¹1 Bin Y, Yong-Bao W, Zhuo Y, Jin-Rui Y. Minimal hydrocelectomy with the aid of scrotoscope: a ten-year experience. Int Braz J Urol. 2014;40:384-9.)”. This result can support the previous observation that minimally invasive hydrocelectomy is safe and requires a short operative time (²2 Emir L, Sunay M, Dadalı M, Karakaya Y, Erol D. Endoscopic versus open hydrocelectomy for the treatment of adult hydroceles: a randomized controlled clinical trial. Int Urol Nephrol. 2011;43:55-9.). It is agreeable that the technique can be useful but the case selection is the important prerequisite. As noted by Bin et al., some cases (such as those with thickening) still required open surgery (¹1 Bin Y, Yong-Bao W, Zhuo Y, Jin-Rui Y. Minimal hydrocelectomy with the aid of scrotoscope: a ten-year experience. Int Braz J Urol. 2014;40:384-9.). Focusing on scrotoscope, it is a useful tool for assessment of scrotal contents (³3 Shafik A. The scrotoscope. A new instrument for examining the scrotal contents. Br J Urol. 1990;65:209-10.). However, it is still considered as an invasive technique. According to our experience from China, the use of B-ultrasonography, which is totally non invasive, can give no different ability to assess scrotal contents (⁴4 Yang J, Huang X. Comparative study of the diagnostic preciseness of scrotoscope and B-ultrasonography on scrotal lesions. Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi.1996;34:173-5.).

REFERENCES

Publication Dates