Diagnosis and management of symptomatic seminal vesicle calculi

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to review the management of patients with symptomatic seminal vesicle calculi, from presentation and diagnosis to postoperative outcomes.

Materials and methods: A systematic review of the English literature in MEDLINE and Embase was performed, based on the following model: patients with a diagnosis of seminal vesicle calculi; all interventions considered with or without control groups with single and comparator interventions; outcomes considered were incidence, presentation, diagnostic methods and treatment. A narrative synthesis of the data was performed according to PRISMA 2009 guidelines. The study protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42016032971).

Results: In total, 213 cases of seminal vesicle calculi from 37 studies were identified between 1928 and 2016. Published articles included cohort studies (16), case–control studies (two) and case reports (19). The most likely aetiology was stasis of ejaculate secondary to impaired drainage of secretions from the seminal vesicles. Transrectal ultrasound remains the primary investigation for haematospermia and painful ejaculation; however, magnetic resonance imaging seems to play an increasingly important role, especially when considering surgery. Transurethral seminal vesiculoscopy and lithotripsy is the ideal procedure for small calculi but requires surgical expertise. For larger calculi a transperitoneal laparoscopic approach is safe in the hands of experienced laparoscopic surgeons.

Conclusions: Modern imaging techniques and cross-sectional imaging are leading to an increased number of diagnosed cases of seminal vesicle calculi. Optimal treatment depends on the stone size and burden, and centralization of services will assist in the development of specialized centres.

Keywords:

• Calculi
• calculus
• haematospermia
• haemospermia
• seminal vesicle
• stone

Ethical standards

The authors declare that they comply with the ethical standards related to this systematic review.

Disclosure statement

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest and no financial support was received for this article.