Prognostic factors associated with bilateral, microsurgical vasovasostomy success

Ghaed, Mohammad Ali; Mahmoodi, F.; Alizadeh, Hamid Reza

doi:10.1016/j.mefs.2018.05.006

Cited by 2 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Eighty studies were included in the quantitative analyses, 25–104 whereas 15 studies were only included in the quantitative synthesis (Figure 1). 105–119 …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The patency rate following vasovasostomy was associated with the time interval between the two operations (vasectomy and vasovasostomy). Having an obstructed vas deferens for over 10 years predicted the failure of vasovasostomy as defined by patency 27,28,105,107 . In addition, repetition of vasectomy reversal was a negative predictor for vasovasostomy success 28 .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…107 Smoking, previous inguinal-area surgery, and post-vasovasostomy complications were predictors of vasovasostomy failure. 107 Requiring a longer duration to ejaculate semen with a motile spermatozoa concentration of more than two million per mL predicted late vasovasostomy failure. 105 Fenig et al 120 present a mathematical tool that can assist doctors in using this nomogram to predict before the surgery if they have to do an epididymovasostomy.…”

Section: Factors Influencing Vasovasostomy Outcomementioning

confidence: 95%

“…Having an obstructed vas deferens for over 10 years predicted the failure of vasovasostomy as defined by patency. 27,28,105,107 In addition, repetition of vasectomy reversal was a negative predictor for vasovasostomy success. 28 However, performing vasovasostomy bilat-erally predicted increased odds of patency.…”

Section: Factors Influencing Vasovasostomy Outcomementioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Vasovasostomy: A systematic review and meta‐analysis comparing macroscopic, microsurgical, and robot‐assisted microsurgical techniques

Seth,

Gibson,

Bulloch

et al. 2023

Andrology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and objectivesVasovasostomy is a cost‐effective procedure for the reversal of vasectomy. A water‐tight adequately blood‐supplied mucosal anastomosis is required for better outcomes. This review aimed to compare the outcome of vasovasostomy performed by three different techniques: macroscopic, pure microsurgical, and robot‐assisted microsurgical techniques.MethodsScopus, Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library databases were searched for relevant studies from January 1901 to June 2023. We conducted our quantitative syntheses using the inverse variance method in OpenMeta software. The study's protocol was registered on PROSPERO.ResultsThis review involved 95 studies of different designs, with a total sample size of 48,132. The majority of operations were performed bilaterally, and participants were monitored for up to 10 years. The pooled patency rate was the highest following robot‐assisted vasovasostomy (94.4%), followed by pure microsurgical vasovasostomy (87.5%), and macroscopic vasovasostomy (83.7%). The pooled pregnancy rate following purely microsurgical vasovasostomy was higher than that of macroscopic vasovasostomy (47.4 vs. 43.7%). Definitive pregnancy rates in robotic vasovasostomy are yet to be determined.ConclusionPatency outcomes for vasovasostomy were best with robot‐assisted microsurgical technique, followed by pure microsurgical technique, and conventional macroscopic technique. Further investigations of robot‐assisted microsurgical vasovasostomy outcomes and randomized control trials are required to support this evidence.

show abstract

“…Eighty studies were included in the quantitative analyses, 25–104 whereas 15 studies were only included in the quantitative synthesis (Figure 1). 105–119 …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Factors Influencing Vasovasostomy Outcomementioning

confidence: 95%

Section: Factors Influencing Vasovasostomy Outcomementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Vasovasostomy: A systematic review and meta‐analysis comparing macroscopic, microsurgical, and robot‐assisted microsurgical techniques

Seth,

Gibson,

Bulloch

et al. 2023

Andrology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The effectiveness of varicocelectomy on male fertility has remained in doubt (3,9). Numerous studies including systematic reviews on clinical results of varicocelectomy have reported improvements in fertility rates and semen parameters (10)(11)(12)(13)(14). However, some studies have reported controversial results, consisting of an unstable improvement in fertility following surgery or even worsened semen parameter (15)(16)(17).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Best time to wait for the improvement of the sperm parameter after varicocelectomy: 3 or 6 months?

Ghaed

Makian

Moradi

et al. 2020

Arch Ital Urol Androl

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To estimate the duration of time required following varicocelectomy to wait for the improvements of semen parameters. Therefore, we characterized the changes with the time in sperm parameters in men after varicocelectomy. Materials and methods: In this prospective cohort study we included consecutively observed men who underwent varicocelectomy between September 2017 and September 2018 in a referral academic hospital. Clinical data of the patients, as well as their semen parameters, were measured before surgery and at 3 and 6 months afterward. Results: In this study, a total of 100 men with average age of 29.5 ± 6.2 years were included. Mean sperm concentration and sperm motility significantly improved by 3 (p < 0.05), but not by 6 months following varicocelectomy. The semen volume and sperm with normal morphology were the same before and after surgery (p > 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in the improvement of semen parameters when comparing 6 months to 3 months postoperatively (p > 0.05). Conclusions: Sperm parameters (concentration and motility) improve by 3 months after varicocelectomy without further improvements. Consequently, physicians should decide quickly after 3-month of varicocelectomy if surgery has been not helpful and then plan other therapies, like assisted reproductive technology (ART) for managing infertility in couples.

show abstract

Prognostic factors associated with bilateral, microsurgical vasovasostomy success

Cited by 2 publications

References 15 publications

Vasovasostomy: A systematic review and meta‐analysis comparing macroscopic, microsurgical, and robot‐assisted microsurgical techniques

Vasovasostomy: A systematic review and meta‐analysis comparing macroscopic, microsurgical, and robot‐assisted microsurgical techniques

Best time to wait for the improvement of the sperm parameter after varicocelectomy: 3 or 6 months?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About