1981Archives of AndrologyRequires access

Vasovasostomy—Microscopic Versus Macroscopic Techniques

Howard N. Fenster, Martin G. McLoughlin

Open publisher page 16 citations

Abstract

Many different surgical techniques of vasovasostomy can be successful. Many factors, both technical and nontechnical, play a role in determining pregnancy. Theoretical considerations such as leakage of sperm, obstruction and narrowing of the anastomosis, suggest that a stentless technique with exact approximation of mucosal edges will result in a better success rate. Careful macroscopic surgery with the use of fine suture material, and experience on the part of the surgeon, will give good results and pregnancy rates of up to 50%. Microsurgery becomes quite important when the anastomosis is performed in the convoluted portion of the vas and epididymis. The microscope allows more mobility in permitting one to determine if the patient has a block proximal to the vasectomy site, and then bypass these blocks. Conventional macroscopic techniques do not allow for this freedom of choice. Factors other than technique are also important and are discussed.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Many different surgical techniques of vasovasostomy can be successful. Many factors, both technical and nontechnical, play a role in determining pregnancy. Theoretical considerations such as leakage of sperm, obstruction and narrowing of the anastomosis, suggest that a stentless technique with exact approximation of mucosal edges will result in a better success rate. Careful macroscopic surgery with the use of fine suture material, and experience on the part of the surgeon, will give good results and pregnancy rates of up to 50%. Microsurgery becomes quite important when the anastomosis is performed in the convoluted portion of the vas and epididymis. The microscope allows more mobility in permitting one to determine if the patient has a block proximal to the vasectomy site, and then bypass these blocks. Conventional macroscopic techniques do not allow for this freedom of choice. Factors other than technique are also important and are discussed.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 16 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Many different surgical techniques of vasovasostomy can be successful. Many factors, both technical and nontechnical, play a role in determining pregnancy. Theoretical considerations such as leakage of sperm, obstruction and narrowing of the anastomosis, suggest that a stentless technique with exact approximation of mucosal edges will result in a better success rate. Careful macroscopic surgery with the use of fine suture material, and experience on the part of the surgeon, will give good results and pregnancy rates of up to 50%. Microsurgery becomes quite important when the anastomosis is performed in the convoluted portion of the vas and epididymis. The microscope allows more mobility in permitting one to determine if the patient has a block proximal to the vasectomy site, and then bypass these blocks. Conventional macroscopic techniques do not allow for this freedom of choice. Factors other than technique are also important and are discussed.

Key concepts: Vasovasostomy, Medicine, Physics, Population, Research methodology, Family planning, Environmental health

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Vasovasostomy—Microscopic Versus Macroscopic Techniques — Research Paper | ScholarLens