Intravasal azoospermia: a surgical dilemma.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the incidence of intravasal azoospermia (IVA) and evaluate which factors before and during surgery influence outcome, by prospectively and intentionally performing bilateral vasovasostomies (VVs) only in men with intraoperative IVA.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Using a multilayer technique, 472 men underwent microsurgical reconstructive procedures. Intravasal fluid was examined for sperm by the surgeon and a pathologist. Strict enrolment criteria included total absence of sperm or sperm parts and bilateral VV as a treatment procedure. Patients were followed up by semen analysis and paternity assessed only by naturally conceived pregnancies.

RESULTS

Of the 472 patients, 27 (5.7%) had bilateral IVA; 15 of these patients were available for a follow-up of 1-47 months. Eleven patients had identical gross appearance of intravasal fluid bilaterally. Of these patients, five had sperm in the ejaculate after surgery (three with clear intravasal fluid and two with no fluid). Bilaterally different vasal fluid was found in four men. Unilateral clear fluid was present in three patients, two of whom had sperm in semen analysed after VV. Overall, there was sperm in the ejaculate in seven of 15 patients with IVA; five of these seven had clear fluid in at least one vas deferens. One patient with unilaterally clear fluid achieved paternity by a naturally conceived pregnancy. The difference between the mean (SEM) obstruction interval in men who had sperm in a semen sample after VV, at 16.7 (3. 30) years, and in persistently azoospermic patients, at 15.5 (1.89) years, was not statistically significant (P = 0.741).

CONCLUSION

The results of VV in patients with IVA are unsatisfactory; the patency rate is higher in men with copious clear fluid in at least one vas. The obstructive interval in patients with IVA does not appear to influence the outcome of VV.