Universidad El Bosque, Avenida Kr. 9 No. 131 A - 02, Bogotá, Colombia.
Universidad El Bosque, Avenida Kr. 9 No. 131 A - 02, Bogotá, Colombia; Profamilia, Teusaquillo Calle 34 No. 14 - 52, Bogotá, Colombia.
Contraception. 2020 May;101(5):342-349. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2020.02.001. Epub 2020 Feb 13.
To evaluate the occlusive failure risk of ligation and excision with fascial interposition vasectomy technique. There are doubts about the effectiveness of this technique largely used in Asia and Latin America.
We conducted a prospective longitudinal observational descriptive study among men who underwent a vasectomy performed under local anesthesia in a clinic specializing in sexual and reproductive health services in Bogotá, Colombia. Three urologists used the Percutaneous No-Scalpel Vasectomy technique to isolate the vas deferens. They then ligated the vas, excised a 1 cm segment between ligations, and ligated the fascia on the prostatic end to cover the testicular end. We requested all patients to submit a semen sample three months after the vasectomy. We defined probable and confirmed vasectomy failure as 1-4.9 million sperm/ml and 5 million sperm/ml or more or any number of motile sperm observed on the last semen sample available, respectively.
Among 1149 participants, 581 (51%) had at least one post-vasectomy semen analysis. The overall failure risk was 5.2% (30/581; 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.6%-7.3%) with probable and confirmed failure risk of 1.9% (11/581; 95% CI 1.1%-3.4%) and 3.3% (19/581; 95% CI 2.1%-5.1%), respectively. Older men and one urologist had statistically significant higher risk of overall failure.
Our study confirmed that the ligation and excision with fascial interposition vasectomy technique is associated with an unacceptable risk of failure.
Surgeons who use the ligation and excision with fascial interposition vasectomy technique and countries with large vasectomy programs in Asia and Latin America that still recommend this technique should consider adopting alternatives to reduce the failure risk to below 1% as recommended by the American Urological Association.
评估结扎和切除联合筋膜间置输精管技术的闭塞性失败风险。这种技术在亚洲和拉丁美洲被广泛应用,但有效性仍存在争议。
我们在哥伦比亚波哥大一家专门从事性健康和生殖健康服务的诊所,对接受局部麻醉下输精管切除术的男性进行了前瞻性纵向观察描述性研究。三位泌尿科医生使用经皮无刀输精管切除术技术来分离输精管。然后结扎输精管,在结扎之间切除 1 厘米段,并在前列腺端结扎筋膜以覆盖睾丸端。我们要求所有患者在输精管切除术后三个月提交精液样本。我们将可能和证实的输精管失败定义为最后一次可用精液样本中每毫升 1-490 万精子和 500 万精子或更多,或观察到任何数量的活动精子。
在 1149 名参与者中,有 581 名(51%)至少进行了一次输精管切除术后精液分析。总体失败风险为 5.2%(30/581;95%置信区间 [CI] 3.6%-7.3%),可能和证实的失败风险分别为 1.9%(11/581;95%CI 1.1%-3.4%)和 3.3%(19/581;95%CI 2.1%-5.1%)。年龄较大的男性和一位泌尿科医生的总体失败风险有统计学显著升高。
我们的研究证实,结扎和切除联合筋膜间置输精管技术与不可接受的失败风险相关。
使用结扎和切除联合筋膜间置输精管技术的外科医生和亚洲及拉丁美洲仍推荐该技术的输精管切除术项目大国应考虑采用替代方法,将失败风险降低到美国泌尿科协会建议的 1%以下。