Outcome and Late Failures Compared in 4 Techniques of Microsurgical Vasoepididymostomy in 153 Consecutive Men

Abstract

Although vasoepididymostomy remains a technically demanding microsurgical procedure, recent technical innovations of TIVE and LIVE offer better or comparable outcomes compared with EE and ES procedures with the use of fewer sutures, which simplifies the performance of the anastomosis. In addition, the late failure rate is lower with the use of the intussusception techniques (LIVE and TIVE) with only 1 late failure in 22 men with return of sperm to the ejaculate procedures (4%) compared with 11 of 30 (37%) in the nonintussusception groups (p =0.006).

Clinical observation of loupe-assisted intussusception vasoepididymostomy in the treatment of obstructive azoospermia (analysis of 49 case reports)

“…Only two sutures being used in LIVE provide the advantage of fewer sutures passing through the lumen and fewer knots of suture left outside the anastomosis, which may decrease the possibility of fibrosis and anastomotic stricture. The low failure rate, which was not documented in our group, is lower with the use of the intussusception techniques compared with nonintussusception procedures [14].…”

Vasectomy in Male Contraception and its Reversal

“…This confirms the epididymal function for spermatozoid maturation [44]. Overall patency is 50% and the pregnancy rate is around 35% [46][47][48].…”

Vasectomy reversal

“…Microsurgical vasoepididymostomy most commonly is performed using an end-to-side anastomosis (24). Modifications of the technique include the triangulation (27), tubular invagination (28), and tubular intussusception techniques (29). In all techniques, the epididymal tubule is pulled up into the lumen of the vas deferens.…”