Alderman P M, Morrison G E
Lion's Gate Hospital, North Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
J Fam Pract. 1999 Sep;48(9):719-21.
For more than a decade a new method of vas deferens access, the no-scalpel vasectomy (NSV), has been promoted and publicized in the United States, Canada, and other countries and has gained remarkable acceptance. Supporters of NSVs claim fewer hematomas, less bleeding, fewer infections, shorter operating times, less pain, and an enhanced acceptance of vasectomy.
The records of a series of 619 consecutive vasectomies performed by the same surgeon using both NSV and standard incision techniques were analyzed to compare the incidence of early complications in each.
The incidence of complications in the series of vasectomies was virtually the same whether NSV or a conventional method was used. Infections occurred in 0.7% of conventional procedures, compared with 0.6% in NSVs; hematomas occurred in 0.3% of both; and no incisional bleeding was seen after either procedure.
The claims made for NSV remain unsubstantiated. This study indicates that either a standard incision or the NSV method of accessing the vas deferens can yield similarly good results.
十多年来，一种新的输精管进入方法——无刀输精管切除术（NSV），已在美国、加拿大和其他国家得到推广和宣传，并获得了显著认可。NSV的支持者声称其血肿更少、出血更少、感染更少、手术时间更短、疼痛更少，且对输精管切除术的接受度更高。
分析了由同一位外科医生使用NSV和标准切口技术连续进行的619例输精管切除术的记录，以比较每种方法早期并发症的发生率。
无论使用NSV还是传统方法，该系列输精管切除术的并发症发生率几乎相同。传统手术中感染发生率为0.7%，NSV为0.6%；两种方法的血肿发生率均为0.3%；两种手术后均未出现切口出血。
NSV的相关声称仍未得到证实。本研究表明，标准切口或NSV进入输精管的方法均可产生同样良好的效果。
