Background: Varicocoeles have been considered for a long time potentially correctable causes for male infertility, even though the correlation of this condition with infertility and sperm damage is still debated. Objective: To present a summary of the evidence evaluation for imaging varicocoeles, to underline the need for a standardized examination technique and for a unique classification, and to focus on pitfalls in image interpretation. Methods: Based on the evidence of the literature, the current role of ultrasound (US) imaging for varicocoeles has been reported and illustrated, with emphasis on examination technique, classification, and pitfalls. Results: US is the imaging modality of choice. It is widely used in Europe, while in other countries clinical classification of varicocoeles is considered sufficient to manage the patient. A number of US classifications exist for varicocoeles, in which the examinnation is performed in different ways. Discussion: An effort toward standardization is mandatory, since lack of standardization contributes to the confusion of the available literature, and has a negative impact on the understanding of the role itself of imaging in patients with varicocoeles. Conclusion: Use of the Sarteschi/Liguori classification for varicocoeles is recommended, since it is the most complete and widely used US scoring system available today. Tubular extratesticular structures resembling varicocoeles, either at palpation or at US, should be identified and correctly characterized.
