
==== Front
Int Urol Nephrol
Int Urol Nephrol
International Urology and Nephrology
0301-1623
1573-2584
Springer Netherlands Dordrecht

38761331
4080
10.1007/s11255-024-04080-y
Urology – Original Paper
Don't wait any longer, conceive in time: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on semen parameters after varicocelectomy
Mei Yangyang 1
Ji Nuo 2
Feng Xingliang drf120@126.com

2
Xu Renfang czyyxrf@163.com

2
Xue Dong xuedongdx@163.com

2
1 https://ror.org/01khmxb55 grid.452817.d Department of Urology, Jiangyin People’s Hospital of Jiangsu Province, Jiangyin, Jiangsu China
2 https://ror.org/051jg5p78 grid.429222.d 0000 0004 1798 0228 Department of Urology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Changzhou, Jiangsu China
18 5 2024
18 5 2024
2024
56 10 32173229
22 4 2024
11 5 2024
© The Author(s) 2024
2024
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Background

Varicocelectomy was considered to be beneficial to patients with varicocele-related infertility. However, there are only a few researchers who have explored the relationship between better timing and postoperative semen improvement in patients.

Methods

We conducted this meta-analysis by enrolling published prospective studies to find out the best waiting time after varicocelectomy to wait for better improvement of semen quality. An extensive search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library to identify eligible studies. The included studies were then analyzed comprehensively using STATA software and standardized mean differences (SMDs) and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals were calculated.

Results

Our comprehensive analysis showed that after varicocelectomy, follow-up results within 3 months or longer showed a significant improvement in semen parameters compared to the preoperative period. Notably, no further improvement in semen parameters was observed when the follow-up period reached six months or longer (semen volume: WMD: − 0.07 (− 0.29, 0.16); sperm concentration: WMD: − 1.33 (− 2.33, − 4.99); sperm motility: WMD: 2.31 (− 0.55, 5.18); sperm morphology: WMD: 1.29 (− 0.66, 3.24); sperm total motile count: WMD: 3.95 (− 6.28, 14.19)).

Conclusions

Three months after varicocelectomy may be the optimal time for semen parameters compared to six months or even longer, which means it is also the preferable time for conception. However, more well-designed prospective studies are needed in the future to validate our conclusion.

Keywords

Varicocele
Varicocelectomy
Semen parameters
Meta-analysis
Systematic review
issue-copyright-statement© Springer Nature B.V. 2024
==== Body
pmcIntroduction

Varicocele, defined as abnormal dilation and tortuosity of internal spermatic veins within the pampiniform plexus [1, 2], is regarded as the most common surgically correctable cause of infertility in men [3]. The prevalence of varicocele in the healthy adult male population was about 15%, in men with primary infertility the prevalence was approximately 35–44%, and the index increased to 45–81% in men with secondary infertility [4–6]. Therefore, it is widely recognized that varicocele can affect the quality of semen in men. Several mechanisms could explain the resultantly impaired semen quality of varicocele, as follows: (i) overproduction of reactive oxygen species [7]; (ii) decrease of antioxidant level [8]; (iii) increase of scrotal temperature [9]; (iv) sperm DNA damage [10].

It is internationally accepted that varicocelectomy is an effective treatment for varicocele and can be helpful for patients who suffer from varicocele combined with infertility [11]. Initially, patients with varicocele were more concerned about natural conception rates after surgical treatment [12]. Gradually, the positive effects of varicocelectomy on semen quality have attracted more and more attention from clinicians and infertility couples. In general, about 60–70% of men achieve sperm improvement after varicocelectomy16 and there have been several meta-analyses demonstrating this fact [13–16]. Among studies comparing the sperm parameters before and after varicocelectomy, the follow-up time after varicocelectomy varied a lot, ranging from 3 to 12 months [17–19]. However, the sample sizes of these studies were not sufficiently large, and there are no meta-analyses to compare improvements in semen parameters across follow-up times.

For patients and clinicians, it is essential to know the best time to wait for better improvement of semen quality after varicocele surgery. Initially, the recommended waiting time by the Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine was at least 12 months [20]. Later, they changed their recommended waiting time to 3–6 months after varicocele surgery, corresponding to 1–2 normal spermatogenic cycle [21]. The studies on different waiting times after varicocelectomy are well designed and conducted but enrolled less study population. Does longer time mean a better improvement of semen quality, or meaning waiving of varicocelectomy? For managing infertility related to varicocele, it is critical to investigate the best waiting time for better semen quality improvement. Hence, we performed this meta-analysis to find out the period when semen quality is optimal after varicocelectomy and to provide statistically significant data to guide patients on the timing of conception.

Materials and methods

We performed the present meta-analysis in accordance with the preferred reporting items of the systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) [22]. There was no need to obtain ethical approval and informed consent, owing to the nature of the meta-analysis. The protocol of our systematic review and meta-analysis was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42021249994).

Search strategy

An extensive search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library from the inception dates to 31 March 2024, to identify studies regarding the varicocelectomy on semen parameters over time after surgery. The keywords used for our search were (“varicocele” OR “varicocelectomy” OR “varicocele repair”) AND (“semen parameters” OR “semen quality” OR “semen” OR “sperm” OR “sperm parameters” OR “sperm quality”) AND (“time” OR “months”). The search strategy was adapted to the requests of different electronic databases. The references list of the retrieved research was manually searched to find more eligible studies. The date of the last search was set at March 31, 2024, with no language restrictions applied. First, an initial screening was conducted independently by two writers (Y Mei and R Xu) based on the titles and abstracts. The ineligible studies were excluded for precise reasons. Secondly, the eligibility of all potentially related research was reviewed in full text and final confirmed during the data extraction process. Any disagreements were settled by consensus or in consultation with a third reviewer (X Feng).

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Studies included in our meta-analysis should satisfy all the following inclusion criteria: (a) the studies conducted in human beings and aged older than 18y; (b) the studies compared the semen quality in varicocele patients between pre-surgery and different durations after surgery; (c) the studies possessed sufficient data to pool results; (d) sperm parameters were assessed based on the World Health Organization (WHO) 2010 guideline. Studies were excluded if: (a) insufficient data or duplicated data; (b) patients aged younger than 18y; (c)study population undergoing surgery not for infertility; (d)review, meta-analysis, case reports, meeting abstracts, editorial comments, expert opinions, animal tests; (e) semen analysis unrelated to time after surgery. For studies published more than once, studies reporting the most informative and sufficient data were included in our meta-analysis.

Data extraction and quality assessment

The following details were independently extracted by two writers (Y Mei and N Ji): name of the first author, publication year, and location of recruitment, design of the study, size of the sample, age of the population, follow-up duration, sperm paraments (sperm motility, semen volume, total motile sperm count, sperm concentration, sperm morphology).

The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS) tool [23] was used to evaluate the quality of included cohort studies by two authors (Y Mei and X Feng) independently. Selection, comparability, and outcome were the main parameters of the NOS tool, with a total score of 7 or more indicating a high-quality study, and studies with a score of less than 3 were considered low-quality studies. If the two authors draw inconsonant score, the study would be reevaluated by the third senior reviewer (D Xue).

Statistical analysis

The statistical analysis and meta-analysis were conducted using STATA 16.0 (Stata Corp, College Station, TX, USA). The P value < 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant. Pre-surgery and post-surgery semen parameters were compared. The weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated to estimate the combined effect. The Z test and P value were used to measure the significance of the pooled results. The inconsistency (I2) statistics and Cochran Q test were used to assess the heterogeneity among the included studies. The fixed-effect model was used to pool data if there was no heterogeneity among studies (P > 0.05, or I2 < 50%), otherwise, the random-effect model was used. We performed sensitivity analyses, eliminating each individual study from the meta-analysis in each case to estimate the stability of the analyses and further analyses were performed in subgroups to explore sources of heterogeneity. We quantified the publication bias by Begg’s test. The publication bias existed if the P value of Begg’s test was < 0.05, on the contrary, it indicated no significant publication bias.

Results

Study selection results and basic characteristics

We initially identified a total of 727 records related to our topic, including 507 records from PubMed, 137 records from Cochrane Library, 77 records from Web of Science. Six studies were identified by manually searching the reference lists of individual studies. First, we excluded 240 duplicated records by comparing title, authors, and publication year. Subsequently, a total of 464 records were excluded due to irrelevance, based on the content of their titles and abstracts. Then, 23 records remained for assessing the full-text eligibility. Upon reviewing the full texts of the remaining records, only four studies [2, 24–26] were included in our meta-analysis. Additionally, 19 articles were excluded for various reasons: eight were not related to semen (N = 8), one lacked a comparative group (N = 1), six were animal test articles (N = 6), two were review articles (N = 2), and two were letters to the editors (N = 2). The detailed study selection process is shown in Fig. 1. The publication year of the included studies ranged from 2012 to 2023, including a total of 279 varicocele patients. All these studies were prospective studies, and semen parameters were recorded pre-surgery, 3 months, 6 months, or 12 months after surgery. Table 1 detailed individual data regarding the name of the first author, year of publication, and location of recruitment, design of the study, size of the sample, age of the population, follow-up duration, and sperm parameters. The quality assessment results are shown in Table 2. All studies were regarded as high-quality studies based on NOS scores.Fig. 1 Flow diagram of the study selection process

Table 1 Characteristics of studies included in the meta-analysis

First author (Year)	Country	Study design	Sample size	Age	Duration after varicocelectomy	Semen parameters	
Bakri et al. (2012)[24]	Canada	Prospective study	100	36 ± 4.87	3 and 6 months	Semen volume	
Fukuda et al. (2015) [2]	Japan	Prospective study	71	34.1 ± 5.3	3 and 12 months	Sperm concentration	
Ghaed et al. (2020) [25]	Iran	Prospective study	100	29.5 ± 6.2	3 and 6 months	Sperm motility	
Madhusoodanan et al. (2020) [26]	American	Prospective study	18	33.6 ± 8.9	3 and 12 months	Sperm morphology	

Table 2 Quality assessment of studies included in the meta-analysis by using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale

First author	Publication year	Selection	Comparability	Outcome	Total	
Bakri et al. (2012) [24]	2012	4	2	2	8	
Fukuda et al. (2015) [2]	2015	3	2	2	7	
Ghaed et al. (2020) [25]	2020	3	2	2	7	
Madhusoodanan et al. (2020) [26]	2020	3	2	2	7	

Sperm parameters in varicocele patients before surgery and 3 months after surgery

All the semen parameters were compared between pre-surgery and 3 months after surgery. The results were pooled to calculate the WMD and 95% CI. Random effects models or fixed effects models were used according to the heterogeneity among the included studies. The results were showed in Fig. 2.Fig. 2 Forest plot and meta-analysis of semen parameters between pre-surgery and 3 months after varicocelectomy. (A Semen volume; B sperm concentration; C: sperm motility; D sperm morphology; E total motile sperm count)

Semen volume

The semen volumes were reported in all included studies. The fixed-effect model was used to pool the data, based on the heterogeneity detection (I2 = 0.0%, P = 0.818). After varicocelectomy, no significant difference in semen volume was found between pre-surgery and 3 months after surgery (WMD: − 0.05 (− 0.26, 0.16)) (Fig. 2A).

Sperm concentration

Similarly, all eligible studies reported the sperm concentration. We still compared the sperm concentration between pre-surgery and 3 months after surgery. It increased by 7.23 million per ML when 3 months after varicocelectomy (WMD: − 7.23 (− 10.89, − 3.57)). Moderate heterogeneity was detected among studies (I2 = 60.7%, P = 0.057) (Fig. 2B).

Sperm motility

Sperm motility was compared between pre-surgery and 3 months after varicocelectomy. The results showed that sperm motility increased by 6.31% when 3 months after varicocelectomy (WMD: − 6.31 (− 9.13, − 3.50)), with medium heterogeneity (I2 = 58.2%, P = 0.066) (Fig. 2C).

Sperm morphology

Only 2 out of 4 studies reported sperm morphology between pre-surgery and 3 months after varicocelectomy. However, no significant improvement in sperm morphology was revealed by meta-analysis (WMD: 2.39 (− 0.13, 4.91)). And no significant heterogeneity was detected among the 2 studies (I2 = 52.4%, P = 0.147) (Fig. 2D).

Sperm total motile count

Three studies reported the total motile sperm count (TMSC). The results showed a significant increase of TMSC when detecting in 3 months after surgery (WMD: − 19.08 (− 35.68, − 2.48)), but the degree of heterogeneity was high (I2 = 68.6%, P = 0.042) (Fig. 2E).

Sperm parameters in varicocele patients before surgery and 6 or 12 months after surgery

Similar semen parameters were compared between pre-surgery and 6 or 12 months after surgery. The pooled results are shown in Fig. 3. All the results showed that semen parameters improvements of 6 or 12 months after surgery were lower than those of 3 months after surgery.Fig. 3 Forest plot and meta-analysis of semen parameters between pre-surgery and longer time (6 or 12 months) after varicocelectomy. (A Semen volume; B sperm concentration; C sperm motility; D sperm morphology; E total motile sperm count)

Semen volume

Four studies reported the semen volume in varicocele patients between pre-surgery and 6 or 12 months after surgery. The pooled results showed no significant improvement in semen volume with a WMD of − 0.11 (− 0.34, 0.12), and the degree of heterogeneity was acceptable (I2 = 0.0%, P = 0.755). (Fig. 3A).

Sperm concentration

Four studies provided data about sperm concentration. The meta-analysis result of the random-effect model indicated that the sperm concentration of 6 or 12 months after surgery in varicocele patients was higher than that before surgery (WMD: − 6.43 (− 12.41, − 0.46). The heterogeneity was significant based on I2 value (I2 = 68.8%, P = 0.022) (Fig. 3B).

Sperm motility

Four studies reported sperm motility before surgery and 6 or 12 months after surgery. The results showed that sperm motility increased by 4.00% when 6 or 12 months after varicocelectomy (WMD: − 4.00 (− 6.85, − 1.15)), with medium heterogeneity (I2 = 59.2%, P = 0.062) (Fig. 3C).

Sperm morphology

Only 2 out of 4 studies reported the sperm morphology between pre-surgery and 6 or 12 months after varicocelectomy. However, the sperm morphology of 6 or 12 months after surgery showed a significant decrease when compared to sperm morphology before surgery (WMD: 3.81 (1.50, 6.12)), and the heterogeneity was acceptable (I2 = 47.5%, P = 0.168) (Fig. 3D).

Sperm total motile count

Three studies reported the total motile sperm count. The results showed no significant increase of TMSC when detecting in 6 or 12 months after surgery (WMD: − 12.20(− 28.49, 4.09)), but the degree of heterogeneity was high (I2 = 68.6%, P = 0.042) (Fig. 3E).

Sperm parameters in varicocele patients 3 months after surgery and 6 or 12 months after surgery

All eligible studies reported the semen parameters of varicocele patients between 3 months after surgery and 6 or 12 months after surgery. The meta-analysis results of these comparisons are shown in Fig. 4.Fig. 4 Forest plot and meta-analysis of semen parameters between 3 months after varicocelectomy and longer time (6 or 12 months) after varicocelectomy. (A Semen volume; B sperm concentration; C sperm motility; D sperm morphology; E total motile sperm count)

Semen volume

Four studies reported the semen volume in varicocele patients between 3 months after surgery and 6 or 12 months after surgery. The pooled results showed no significant difference in semen volume with a WMD of − 0.07 (− 0.29, 0.16), and the degree of heterogeneity was acceptable (I2 = 0.0%, P = 0.888) (Fig. 4A).

Sperm concentration

A total of four studies involved data on sperm concentration. The meta-analysis result of the fixed-effect model indicated that the sperm concentration of 6 or 12 months after surgery in varicocele patients was similar to those 3 months after surgery (WMD: − 1.33 (− 2.33, − 4.99). The heterogeneity was significantly based on the I2 value (I2 = 0.0%, P = 0.881) (Fig. 4B).

Sperm motility

Four studies reported sperm motility between 3 months after surgery and 6 or 12 months after surgery. The results showed that sperm motility had no significant difference between the two times (WMD: 2.31 (− 0.55, 5.18)), with negative heterogeneity (I2 = 0.0%, P = 0.562) (Fig. 4C).

Sperm morphology

Two studies reported sperm morphology between 3 months after surgery and 6 or 12 months after varicocelectomy. However, the sperm morphology of 6 or 12 months after surgery showed no significant difference when compared to sperm morphology 3 months after surgery (WMD: 1.29 (− 0.66, 3.24)), and the heterogeneity was acceptable (I2 = 0.0%, P = 0.899) (Fig. 4D).

Sperm total motile count

Three studies reported the total motile sperm count. The results showed no significant difference in TMSC when comparing TMSC between 3 months after surgery and 6 or 12 months after surgery (WMD: 3.95 (− 6.28, 14.19)), and the degree of heterogeneity was acceptable (I2 = 26.8%, P = 0.255) (Fig. 4E).

Subgroup analysis of sperm parameters in varicocele patients 3 months after surgery and 6 or 12 months after varicocelectomy

The subgroup analyses were performed only on the semen parameters between 3 months after surgery and longer time after surgery, which we were most concerned about. Notably, the degree of heterogeneity was acceptable. Time was the major factor that would influence the semen improvement. So, we conducted the subgroup analysis based on different months after surgery. Limited to the data on sperm morphology, no subgroup analysis was conducted to it. As shown in Fig. 5, all the semen parameters remained unchanged after subgroup analysis based on different times after surgery. Notably, the subgroup analysis revealed that there were no significant changes in semen parameters (semen volume, sperm concentration, sperm motility, and total motile sperm count) when comparing results 3 months after surgery to those at 6 months or 12 months after surgery.Fig. 5 Subgroup analysis of semen parameters between 3 months after varicocelectomy and longer time (6 or 12 months) after varicocelectomy based on duration after surgery. (A Semen volume; B sperm concentration; C sperm motility; D total motile sperm count)

Sensitivity analysis and publication bias

Similar to subgroup analysis, the sensitivity analysis and publication bias were conducted on the semen parameters comparison between 3 months after surgery and 6 or 12 months after surgery. As for sensitivity analysis, it was conducted by omitting one study in turn to detect the stability of pooled results and assess the influence of each study on the pooled results. The results were shown in Fig. 6, and indicated stable results of our meta-analysis. In addition, we found no significant publication bias by the Begg’s test, and the visual results are presented in Fig. 7.Fig. 6 Sensitivity analysis of semen parameters comparison between 3 months after varicocelectomy and longer time (6 or 12 months) after varicocelectomy. (A Semen volume; B sperm concentration; C sperm motility; D sperm morphology; E total motile sperm count)

Fig. 7 Publication bias of parameters comparison between 3 months after varicocelectomy and longer time (6 or 12 months) after varicocelectomy. (A Semen volume; B sperm concentration; C sperm motility; D sperm morphology; E total motile sperm count)

Discussion

Presently, the dominant opinion related the clinical varicocele to infertility tightly, based on the crude epidemiological findings of varicocele in the infertility population [27]. Studies conducted over a century concluded that the varicocele was related to inferior quality of semen, damaged sperm function, and testicular histology. No precise theory could completely explain the relationship between infertility and varicocele. Among several proposed mechanisms, the most commonly accepted one was that oxidative stress due to varicocele reduces spermatogenesis [28]. In addition, heat stress could also induce the production of reactive oxygen species, increasing the level of oxidative stress [29]. The oxidative stress could harm germ cells, influence non-spermatogenic cells, and the basal lamina of seminiferous tubules, ultimately resulting in changes in semen quality, including semen concentration, sperm morphology, and sperm motility [30].

Similar to the controversial literature related to infertility and varicocele, the relationship between varicocelectomy and improvement in semen quality remains controversial. However, the majority of published literature acknowledged the positive impact that varicocelectomy can achieve on semen quality, including original researches [31] and meta-analysis [13, 32, 33]. A Baazeem et al. [34] conducted a well-designed meta-analysis that included 22 studies to clarify the positive impact of varicocelectomy on semen quality. They concluded that varicocelectomy can improve sperm concentration (elevated by 12.32 × 106 sperm/mL, P < 0.0001), total motility (elevated by 10.86%, P < 0.0001), and progressive sperm motility (elevated by 9.69%, P = 0.003). Furthermore, several studies investigated whether varicocelectomy could improve the outcome of pregnancy, which is the most critically significant question [35–38]. It has been reported that there is an increase in spontaneous pregnancy rates after varicocelectomy [39]. Generally, the present evidence supports the favorable impact of varicocelectomy on the outcome of pregnancy.

However, fewer studies were conducted to explore the length of time after varicocele repair, expecting a better improvement of semen parameters. In 2012, Ayman et al. conducted the first prospective study to compare the semen parameters after varicocelectomy, based on different durations after surgery [24] They found that the semen quality would improve after varicocelectomy no matter at 3, 6, or 9 months. However, the semen parameters didn’t improve further by 6 months or longer. Then, another study conducted by T. Fukuda et al. also compared the semen parameters at 3 and 12 months after varicocele repair. The results were consistent with the former one. The two prospective studies concluded that the initial improvement of semen parameters after varicocelectomy should occur at least 3 months after surgery. However, no further improvement will be accomplished when waiting for more than 3 months. Our meta-analysis enrolled more varicocele population showed that semen parameters before surgery were inferior to that at 3, 6, 12, and longer time after surgery. It still validates the positive impact on semen parameters of varicocele patients by varicocelectomy. However, when comparing the semen parameters among different durations after surgery, we found that no further improvements were found based on longer waiting time after surgery. The improvement of semen quality after surgery should be time-dependent.

Considering that time is the key factor influencing the improvement degree of semen quality, we conducted a subgroup analysis based on the different durations after varicocele repair. When comparing the semen quality between 3 months and longer time after surgery, the semen quality didn’t show any further improvement in longer time after surgery. Actually, another prospective study [25] was conducted to compare semen parameters between 3 and 6 months after surgery, regarding semen volume, sperm concentration, sperm morphology, and progressive motile sperm count. No statistical differences in these parameters were found between the two different durations after surgery. Although Vinayak et al. [26] considered that the semen parameters improvement would continue for more than 12 months. They just compared the semen paraments between baseline and 12 months. The limitation of their study is the lack of comparison of semen parameters for different durations after surgery.

Previous studies just verified that varicocelectomy would potentially improve the semen quality and spontaneous pregnancy outcomes of clinical varicocele patients. With the development of assistant reproductive technology (ART), several methods have been approved for men with clinical varicocele combined with infertility, which includes in vitro fertilization (IVF), intrauterine insemination (IUI), or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) [40]. Moreover, it has been proved that these options could improve the chance of conceiving for infertility couples [41]. So, for elderly couples, ART would be superior to varicocelectomy based on efficacy. However, they would miss the benefit of varicocele, when they turned to ART. Accordingly, it is critical for couples to find the best time to wait for better improvement of semen parameters.

Our results supply a best waiting time after varicocele surgery for patients and clinicians. For couples with varicocele-related infertility, varicocelectomy should be supplied to the men. And they could turn to ART when no obvious improvements in semen parameters were observed 3 months after surgery.

Limited to available data, no further analyses were conducted to explore the basic characteristics of semen quality on the best time waiting for the improvement. But, Teruo et al. conducted it based on the baseline TMSC.2 They found that the time-dependent changes of semen parameters showed similar results based on different baseline TMSC (< 3 million, 3–9 million, > 9 million respectively). On the contrary, another prospective study [42] demonstrated that the improvement of semen quality would continue up to 12 months after surgery based on the baseline TMSC > 9 million, compared to the baseline TMSC < 5 million or ranging 5 million to 9 million. The controversial conclusion means that further additional well-designed research is needed to evaluate the effect of baseline semen characteristics on the time-dependent changes of semen parameters after surgery.

To our knowledge, the present meta-analysis is the first one to explore the effect of time on semen parameters after varicocelectomy. The former meta-analyses mainly concentrated on the following comparisons: [1] compared the semen parameters before and after varicocelectomy [13]; [2] compared semen parameters between bilateral varicocelectomy and unilateral varicocelectomy [43]; [3] compared the semen parameters among different operation methods [44]. Less importance was attached to time after varicocelectomy. Our results would greatly remind couples and physicians to pay attention to the best time for semen parameters improvement, and better managing infertility after varicocelectomy. However, several limitations should be mentioned when interpreting our results. First, the number of studies included in our meta-analysis was small, which limited statistical power. Second, not all studies included all sperm parameters (semen volume, sperm motility, sperm concentration, and sperm morphology). However, all eligible studies for this meta-analysis were considered to be high-quality studies.

Conclusions

The findings of our meta-analysis showed that the semen parameters following varicocelectomy would be maintained for 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months. However, semen parameters do not show further improvement beyond three months post-varicocelectomy when compared to results observed at six months or later. Consequently, three months following varicocelectomy may be the best time to conceive for managing varicocele-related infertility. It also alerted the physicians that time is essential to varicocele patients after varicocelectomy. Notably, more well-designed prospective studies are needed in the future to validate our conclusion.

Author contributions

Conception and design: YY Mei, XL Feng, RF Xu, D Xue; Administrative support: RF Xu, D Xue; Provision of study materials or patients: YY Mei, N Ji, XL Feng; Collection and assembly of data: YY Mei, N Ji, XL Feng, RF Xu, D; Data analysis and interpretation: Y Mei, X Feng, D Xue; Manuscript writing: Y Mei, N Ji, X Feng, D Xue; All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.

Funding

This work was supported by the Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province (BK20200180 and BK20211064), Changzhou Sci&Tech Program (CE20235059 and CJ20230051), Changzhou Key Medical Discipline (CZXK202209) and Top Talent of Changzhou “The 14th Five-Year Plan” High-Level Health Talents Training Project (2022260), and the Youth talent science and technology project of Changzhou Health Commission (QN202109).

Data availability

Data can be obtained from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Ethical approval

This meta-analysis involved reviewing data from existing studies, negating the need for additional ethical approval from our institution.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
==== Refs
References

1. Jarow JP Effects of varicocele on male fertility Hum Reprod Update 2001 7 59 64 10.1093/humupd/7.1.59 11212076
Jarow JP (2001) Effects of varicocele on male fertility. Hum Reprod Update 7:59–6411212076 10.1093/humupd/7.1.59
2. Fukuda T Miyake H Enatsu N Assessment of time-dependent changes in semen parameters in infertile men after microsurgical varicocelectomy Urology 2015 86 48 51 10.1016/j.urology.2015.04.014 26142582
Fukuda T, Miyake H, Enatsu N et al (2015) Assessment of time-dependent changes in semen parameters in infertile men after microsurgical varicocelectomy. Urology 86:48–5126142582 10.1016/j.urology.2015.04.014
3. Redmon JB Carey P Pryor JL Varicocele–the most common cause of male factor infertility? Hum Reprod Update 2002 8 53 58 10.1093/humupd/8.1.53 11866240
Redmon JB, Carey P, Pryor JL (2002) Varicocele–the most common cause of male factor infertility? Hum Reprod Update 8:53–5811866240 10.1093/humupd/8.1.53
4. Damsgaard J Joensen UN Carlsen E Varicocele is associated with impaired semen quality and reproductive hormone levels: a study of 7035 healthy young men from six European countries Eur Urol 2016 70 1019 1029 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.06.044 27423503
Damsgaard J, Joensen UN, Carlsen E et al (2016) Varicocele is associated with impaired semen quality and reproductive hormone levels: a study of 7035 healthy young men from six European countries. Eur Urol 70:1019–102927423503 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.06.044
5. Gorelick JI Goldstein M Loss of fertility in men with varicocele Fertil Steril 1993 59 613 616 10.1016/S0015-0282(16)55809-9 8458466
Gorelick JI, Goldstein M (1993) Loss of fertility in men with varicocele. Fertil Steril 59:613–6168458466 10.1016/S0015-0282(16)55809-9
6. Jarow JP Coburn M Sigman M Incidence of varicoceles in men with primary and secondary infertility Urology 1996 47 73 76 10.1016/S0090-4295(99)80385-9 8560666
Jarow JP, Coburn M, Sigman M (1996) Incidence of varicoceles in men with primary and secondary infertility. Urology 47:73–768560666 10.1016/S0090-4295(99)80385-9
7. Altintas R Ediz C Celik H The effect of varicocoelectomy on the relationship of oxidative stress in peripheral and internal spermatic vein with semen parameters Andrology 2016 4 442 446 10.1111/andr.12172 26945912
Altintas R, Ediz C, Celik H et al (2016) The effect of varicocoelectomy on the relationship of oxidative stress in peripheral and internal spermatic vein with semen parameters. Andrology 4:442–44626945912 10.1111/andr.12172
8. Gholirad S Razi M Hassani BH Tracing of zinc and iron in experimentally induced varicocele: correlation with oxidative, nitrosative and carbonyl stress Andrologia 2017 10.1111/and.12687 27682184
Gholirad S, Razi M, Hassani BH (2017) Tracing of zinc and iron in experimentally induced varicocele: correlation with oxidative, nitrosative and carbonyl stress. Andrologia. 10.1111/and.1268727682184 10.1111/and.12687
9. Merla A Ledda A Di Donato L Use of infrared functional imaging to detect impaired thermoregulatory control in men with asymptomatic varicocele Fertil Steril 2022 78 199 200 10.1016/S0015-0282(02)03155-2
Merla A, Ledda A, Di Donato L et al (2022) Use of infrared functional imaging to detect impaired thermoregulatory control in men with asymptomatic varicocele. Fertil Steril 78:199–20010.1016/S0015-0282(02)03155-2
10. Hauser R Paz G Botchan A Varicocele: effect on sperm functions Hum Reprod Update 2001 7 482 485 10.1093/humupd/7.5.482 11556495
Hauser R, Paz G, Botchan A et al (2001) Varicocele: effect on sperm functions. Hum Reprod Update 7:482–48511556495 10.1093/humupd/7.5.482
11. Will MA Swain J Fode M The great debate: varicocele treatment and impact on fertility Fertil Steril 2011 95 841 852 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.01.002 21272869
Will MA, Swain J, Fode M et al (2011) The great debate: varicocele treatment and impact on fertility. Fertil Steril 95:841–85221272869 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.01.002
12. Peng J Zhang Z Cui W Spontaneous pregnancy rates in Chinese men undergoing microsurgical subinguinal varicocelectomy and possible preoperative factors affecting the outcomes Fertil Steril 2015 103 635 639 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.12.091 25624191
Peng J, Zhang Z, Cui W et al (2015) Spontaneous pregnancy rates in Chinese men undergoing microsurgical subinguinal varicocelectomy and possible preoperative factors affecting the outcomes. Fertil Steril 103:635–63925624191 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.12.091
13. Schauer I Madersbacher S Jost R The impact of varicocelectomy on sperm parameters: a meta-analysis J Urol 2012 187 1540 1547 10.1016/j.juro.2011.12.084 22425089
Schauer I, Madersbacher S, Jost R et al (2012) The impact of varicocelectomy on sperm parameters: a meta-analysis. J Urol 187:1540–154722425089 10.1016/j.juro.2011.12.084
14. Kim HJ Seo JT Kim KJ Clinical significance of subclinical varicocelectomy in male infertility: systematic review and meta-analysis Andrologia 2016 48 654 661 10.1111/and.12495 26589369
Kim HJ, Seo JT, Kim KJ et al (2016) Clinical significance of subclinical varicocelectomy in male infertility: systematic review and meta-analysis. Andrologia 48:654–66126589369 10.1111/and.12495
15. Wang YJ Zhang RQ Lin YJ Relationship between varicocele and sperm DNA damage and the effect of varicocele repair: a meta-analysis Reprod Biomed Online 2012 25 307 314 10.1016/j.rbmo.2012.05.002 22809864
Wang YJ, Zhang RQ, Lin YJ et al (2012) Relationship between varicocele and sperm DNA damage and the effect of varicocele repair: a meta-analysis. Reprod Biomed Online 25:307–31422809864 10.1016/j.rbmo.2012.05.002
16. Madgar I Weissenberg R Lunenfeld B Controlled trial of high spermatic vein ligation for varicocele in infertile men Fertil Steril 1995 63 120 124 10.1016/S0015-0282(16)57306-3 7805900
Madgar I, Weissenberg R, Lunenfeld B et al (1995) Controlled trial of high spermatic vein ligation for varicocele in infertile men. Fertil Steril 63:120–1247805900 10.1016/S0015-0282(16)57306-3
17. Morini D Spaggiari G Daolio J Improvement of sperm morphology after surgical varicocele repair Andrology 2021 9 1176 1184 10.1111/andr.13012 33825345
Morini D, Spaggiari G, Daolio J et al (2021) Improvement of sperm morphology after surgical varicocele repair. Andrology 9:1176–118433825345 10.1111/andr.13012
18. Orhan I Onur R Semercioz A Comparison of two different microsurgical methods in the treatment of varicocele Archives of andrology 2005 51 213 220 10.1080/01485010590919648 16025860
Orhan I, Onur R, Semercioz A et al (2005) Comparison of two different microsurgical methods in the treatment of varicocele. Archives of andrology 51:213–22016025860 10.1080/01485010590919648
19. Nieschlag E Hertle L Fischedick A Update on treatment of varicocele: counselling as effective as occlusion of the vena spermatica Hum Reprod Update 1998 13 2147 2150 10.1093/humrep/13.8.2147
Nieschlag E, Hertle L, Fischedick A et al (1998) Update on treatment of varicocele: counselling as effective as occlusion of the vena spermatica. Hum Reprod Update 13:2147–215010.1093/humrep/13.8.2147
20. Practice Committee of American Society for Reproductive M. Report on varicocele and infertility. Fertil Steril. 2008. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.08.050
21. Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive M. Society for Male R, Urology. Report on varicocele and infertility: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2014. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.10.007
22. Shamseer L Moher D Clarke M Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation BMJ 2015 350 g7647 10.1136/bmj.g7647 25555855
Shamseer L, Moher D, Clarke M et al (2015) Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation. BMJ 350:g764725555855 10.1136/bmj.g7647
23. Stang A Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses Eur J Epidemiol 2010 25 603 605 10.1007/s10654-010-9491-z 20652370
Stang A (2010) Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses. Eur J Epidemiol 25:603–60520652370 10.1007/s10654-010-9491-z
24. Al Bakri A Lo K Grober E Time for improvement in semen parameters after varicocelectomy J Urol 2012 187 227 231 10.1016/j.juro.2011.09.041 22100000
Al Bakri A, Lo K, Grober E et al (2012) Time for improvement in semen parameters after varicocelectomy. J Urol 187:227–23122100000 10.1016/j.juro.2011.09.041
25 Ghaed MA Makian SA Moradi A Best time to wait for the improvement of the sperm parameter after varicocelectomy: 3 or 6 months? Arch Italian Urol Androl 2020 10.4081/aiua.2020.3.259
Ghaed MA, Makian SA, Moradi A et al (2020) Best time to wait for the improvement of the sperm parameter after varicocelectomy: 3 or 6 months? Arch Italian Urol Androl. 10.4081/aiua.2020.3.25910.4081/aiua.2020.3.259
26. Madhusoodanan V Patel P Blachman-Braun R Semen parameter improvements after microsurgical subinguinal varicocele repair are durable for more than 12 months Can Urol Assoc J 2020 14 E80 E83 31599718
Madhusoodanan V, Patel P, Blachman-Braun R et al (2020) Semen parameter improvements after microsurgical subinguinal varicocele repair are durable for more than 12 months. Can Urol Assoc J 14:E80–E8331599718
27. Kupis L Dobronski PA Radziszewski P Varicocele as a source of male infertility - current treatment techniques Central European J Urol 2015 68 365 370
Kupis L, Dobronski PA, Radziszewski P (2015) Varicocele as a source of male infertility - current treatment techniques. Central European J Urol 68:365–370
28. Agarwal A Prabakaran S Allamaneni SS Relationship between oxidative stress, varicocele and infertility: a meta-analysis Reprod Biomed Online 2006 12 630 633 10.1016/S1472-6483(10)61190-X 16790111
Agarwal A, Prabakaran S, Allamaneni SS (2006) Relationship between oxidative stress, varicocele and infertility: a meta-analysis. Reprod Biomed Online 12:630–63316790111 10.1016/S1472-6483(10)61190-X
29. Cho CL Esteves SC Agarwal A Novel insights into the pathophysiology of varicocele and its association with reactive oxygen species and sperm DNA fragmentation Asian J Androl 2016 18 186 193 10.4103/1008-682X.170441 26732105
Cho CL, Esteves SC, Agarwal A (2016) Novel insights into the pathophysiology of varicocele and its association with reactive oxygen species and sperm DNA fragmentation. Asian J Androl 18:186–19326732105 10.4103/1008-682X.170441
30 Romeo C Santoro G Free radicals in adolescent varicocele testis Oxid Med Cell Long 2014 10.1155/2014/912878
Romeo C, Santoro G (2014) Free radicals in adolescent varicocele testis. Oxid Med Cell Long. 10.1155/2014/91287810.1155/2014/912878
31. Kibar Y Seckin B Erduran D The effects of subinguinal varicocelectomy on Kruger morphology and semen parameters J Urol 2002 168 1071 1074 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)64577-6 12187225
Kibar Y, Seckin B, Erduran D (2002) The effects of subinguinal varicocelectomy on Kruger morphology and semen parameters. J Urol 168:1071–107412187225 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)64577-6
32. Qiu D Shi Q Pan L Efficacy of varicocelectomy for sperm DNA integrity improvement: a meta-analysis Andrologia 2021 53 e13885 10.1111/and.13885 33118219
Qiu D, Shi Q, Pan L (2021) Efficacy of varicocelectomy for sperm DNA integrity improvement: a meta-analysis. Andrologia 53:e1388533118219 10.1111/and.13885
33. Agarwal A Deepinder F Cocuzza M Efficacy of varicocelectomy in improving semen parameters: new meta-analytical approach Urology 2007 70 532 538 10.1016/j.urology.2007.04.011 17905111
Agarwal A, Deepinder F, Cocuzza M et al (2007) Efficacy of varicocelectomy in improving semen parameters: new meta-analytical approach. Urology 70:532–53817905111 10.1016/j.urology.2007.04.011
34. Baazeem A Belzile E Ciampi A Varicocele and male factor infertility treatment: a new meta-analysis and review of the role of varicocele repair Eur Urol 2011 60 796 808 10.1016/j.eururo.2011.06.018 21733620
Baazeem A, Belzile E, Ciampi A et al (2011) Varicocele and male factor infertility treatment: a new meta-analysis and review of the role of varicocele repair. Eur Urol 60:796–80821733620 10.1016/j.eururo.2011.06.018
35 Kroese AC de Lange NM Collins J Surgery or embolization for varicoceles in subfertile men Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012 10.1002/14651858.CD000479.pub5 23076888
Kroese AC, de Lange NM, Collins J et al (2012) Surgery or embolization for varicoceles in subfertile men. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 10.1002/14651858.CD000479.pub523076888 10.1002/14651858.CD000479.pub5
36 Evers JL Collins JA Surgery or embolisation for varicocele in subfertile men Cochrane Database Sys Rev 2004 10.1002/14651858
Evers JL, Collins JA (2004) Surgery or embolisation for varicocele in subfertile men. Cochrane Database Sys Rev. 10.1002/1465185810.1002/14651858
37 Evers JH Collins J Clarke J Surgery or embolisation for varicoceles in subfertile men Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2008 10.1002/14651858 18646066
Evers JH, Collins J, Clarke J (2008) Surgery or embolisation for varicoceles in subfertile men. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 10.1002/1465185818646066 10.1002/14651858
38 Evers JH Collins J Clarke J Surgery or embolisation for varicoceles in subfertile men Cochrane Database Sys Rev 2009 10.1002/14651858
Evers JH, Collins J, Clarke J (2009) Surgery or embolisation for varicoceles in subfertile men. Cochrane Database Sys Rev. 10.1002/1465185810.1002/14651858
39. Abdel-Meguid TA Al-Sayyad A Tayib A Does varicocele repair improve male infertility? An evidence-based perspective from a randomized, controlled trial Eur Urol 2011 59 455 461 10.1016/j.eururo.2010.12.008 21196073
Abdel-Meguid TA, Al-Sayyad A, Tayib A et al (2011) Does varicocele repair improve male infertility? An evidence-based perspective from a randomized, controlled trial. Eur Urol 59:455–46121196073 10.1016/j.eururo.2010.12.008
40. Vahidi S Moein M Nabi A Effects of microsurgical varicocelectomy on semen analysis and sperm function tests in patients with different grades of varicocele: role of sperm functional tests in evaluation of treatments outcome Andrologia 2018 50 8 e13069 10.1111/and.13069 29938821
Vahidi S, Moein M, Nabi A et al (2018) Effects of microsurgical varicocelectomy on semen analysis and sperm function tests in patients with different grades of varicocele: role of sperm functional tests in evaluation of treatments outcome. Andrologia 50(8):e1306929938821 10.1111/and.13069
41. Tournaye H Male factor infertility and ART Asian J Androl 2012 14 1 103 108 10.1038/aja.2011.65 22179511
Tournaye H (2012) Male factor infertility and ART. Asian J Androl 14(1):103–10822179511 10.1038/aja.2011.65
42. Pazir Y Erdem S Cilesiz NC Determination of the time for improvement in semen parameters after varicocelectomy Andrologia 2021 53 e13895 10.1111/and.13895 33141946
Pazir Y, Erdem S, Cilesiz NC et al (2021) Determination of the time for improvement in semen parameters after varicocelectomy. Andrologia 53:e1389533141946 10.1111/and.13895
43. Ou N Zhu J Zhang W Bilateral is superior to unilateral varicocelectomy in infertile men with bilateral varicocele: systematic review and meta-analysis Andrologia 2019 51 e13462 10.1111/and.13462 31646672
Ou N, Zhu J, Zhang W et al (2019) Bilateral is superior to unilateral varicocelectomy in infertile men with bilateral varicocele: systematic review and meta-analysis. Andrologia 51:e1346231646672 10.1111/and.13462
44. Li M Wang Z Li H Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery varicocelectomy versus conventional laparoscopic varicocele ligation: a meta-analysis J Int Med Res 2016 44 985 993 10.1177/0300060516659824 27688686
Li M, Wang Z, Li H (2016) Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery varicocelectomy versus conventional laparoscopic varicocele ligation: a meta-analysis. J Int Med Res 44:985–99327688686 10.1177/0300060516659824
