Pathak Ujval S, Balasubramanian Adithya, Beilan Jonathan A, Butaney Mohit, Tatem Alexander J, Thirumavalavan Nannan, Lipshultz Larry I
Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA.
Scott Department of Urology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA.
Transl Androl Urol. 2019 Dec;8(6):728-735. doi: 10.21037/tau.2019.11.04.
Vasectomy reversal (VR) is a specialized procedure currently offered by an increasing number of medical practitioners. One method of VR, vasoepididymostomy (VE), is considered the most challenging microsurgical technique within the field of reproductive urology. We surveyed reproductive urologists to assess current practice patterns regarding both intra-operative and post-operative considerations surrounding VE, with the hypothesis being that more experienced surgeons may have different practice patterns than less experienced surgeons.
An anonymous questionnaire was sent to members of the Society for Male Reproduction and Urology (SMRU). The survey included questions regarding case volume, preferred intra-operative techniques, and post-operative management strategies. Responses were collected using Survey Monkey (San Mateo, CA) and statistically analyzed with chi square tests.
Three hundred and twenty SMRU members were contacted to participate in the survey; 74/320 (23.1%) participants completed the survey in its entirety. Respondents performed varying amounts of VR annually with most surgeons (24%) reporting between 11-20 VR per year and 15 surgeons (20.3%) performed over 60 per year. Comparing practitioners who performed ≤30 VR's annually (n=46) to providers who performed >30 (n=28) revealed a significantly lower rate of VE in low-volume practitioners (≤20% >20%, P<0.0001). The most commonly used technique to create the epididymotomy involved placing two 10-0 sutures into the tubule, followed by a sharp incision between the needles (74.3% of respondents). An intussusception anastomosis was the most commonly reported technique; 46.0% of participants utilize longitudinal stitch placement, while 35.1% place sutures horizontally. The most commonly reported time interval to evaluate the first post-reversal semen analysis (SA) was 6-8 weeks (39.2%). Participants were also asked to rank the progression of adjunctive therapies employed in the setting of a subpar post-reversal SA. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) were the most popular first-line management option (52.7%). Corticosteroids were the most frequently employed second-line option (37.8%). Referral to an ertilization (IVF) center (9.5%) and repeat surgery (2.7%) were also options pursued by survey respondents. Most providers repeated the SA every 8-12 weeks (41.2%) while following sub-par SA parameters.
VE is a technically demanding procedure that requires both microsurgical expertise and appropriate post-operative care. Our analysis demonstrates that a higher VR operative volume is associated with a higher rate of conversion to VE. This indicates either more experienced surgeons are more likely to perform a VE when indicated or more experience surgeons are getting referred and/or performing more complex VRs.
输精管复通术(VR)是一种目前越来越多的医生提供的专业手术。VR的一种方法,即输精管附睾吻合术(VE),被认为是生殖泌尿领域中最具挑战性的显微外科技术。我们对生殖泌尿科医生进行了调查,以评估围绕VE的术中及术后考虑因素的当前实践模式,假设是经验更丰富的外科医生可能与经验较少的外科医生有不同的实践模式。
向男性生殖与泌尿学会(SMRU)的成员发送了一份匿名问卷。该调查包括有关病例数量、首选的术中技术和术后管理策略的问题。使用Survey Monkey(加利福尼亚州圣马特奥)收集回复,并通过卡方检验进行统计分析。
联系了32名SMRU成员参与调查;74/320(23.1%)名参与者完整地完成了调查。受访者每年进行的VR数量各不相同,大多数外科医生(24%)报告每年进行11 - 20例VR,15名外科医生(20.3%)每年进行超过60例。将每年进行≤30例VR的从业者(n = 46)与进行>30例的从业者(n = 28)进行比较,发现低手术量从业者(≤20% >20%,P<0.0001)中VE的发生率显著较低。创建附睾切开术最常用的技术是将两根10-0缝线置入小管,然后在针之间进行锐性切开(74.3%的受访者)。套叠吻合术是最常报告的技术;46.0%的参与者采用纵向缝合放置,而35.1%的参与者采用水平缝合。评估首次复通后精液分析(SA)最常报告的时间间隔是6 - 8周(39.2%)。参与者还被要求对在复通后SA不理想的情况下采用的辅助治疗的进展进行排名。非甾体抗炎药(NSAIDs)是最受欢迎的一线管理选择(52.7%)。皮质类固醇是最常采用的二线选择(37.8%)。转介到体外受精(IVF)中心(9.5%)和再次手术(2.7%)也是受访者采用的选择。大多数提供者在遵循不理想的SA参数时每8 - 12周重复进行SA(41.2%)。
VE是一项技术要求很高的手术,既需要显微外科专业知识,也需要适当的术后护理。我们的分析表明,较高的VR手术量与较高的VE转化率相关。这表明要么经验更丰富 的外科医生在有指征时更有可能进行VE,要么经验更丰富的外科医生被转诊和/或进行更复杂的VR手术。