24
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Vasectomy surgical techniques: a systematic review

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          A wide variety of surgical techniques are used to perform vasectomy. The purpose of this systematic review was to assess if any surgical techniques to isolate or occlude the vas are associated with better outcomes in terms of occlusive and contraceptive effectiveness, and complications.

          Methods

          We searched MEDLINE (1966-June 2003), EMBASE (1980-June 2003), reference lists of retrieved articles, urology textbooks, and our own files looking for studies comparing two or more vasectomy surgical techniques and reporting on effectiveness and complications. From 2,058 titles or abstracts, two independent reviewers identified 224 as potentially relevant. Full reports of 219 articles were retrieved and final selection was made by the same two independent reviewers using the same criteria as for the initial selection. Discrepancies were resolved by involving a third reviewer. Data were extracted and methodological quality of selected studies was assessed by two independent reviewers. Studies were divided in broad categories (isolation, occlusion, and combined isolation and occlusion techniques) and sub-categories of specific surgical techniques performed. Qualitative analyses and syntheses were done.

          Results

          Of 31 comparative studies (37 articles), only four were randomized clinical trials, most studies were observational and retrospective. Overall methodological quality was low. From nine studies on vas isolation, there is good evidence that the no-scalpel vasectomy approach decreases the risk of surgical complications, namely hematoma/bleeding and infection, compared with incisional techniques. Five comparative studies including one high quality randomized clinical trial provided good evidence that fascial interposition (FI) increases the occlusive effectiveness of ligation and excision. Results of 11 comparative studies suggest that FI with cautery of the vas lumen provides the highest level of occlusive effectiveness, even when leaving the testicular end open. Otherwise, firm evidence to support any occlusion technique in terms of increased effectiveness or decreased risk of complications is lacking.

          Conclusions

          Current evidence supports no-scalpel vasectomy as the safest surgical approach to isolate the vas when performing vasectomy. Adding FI increases effectiveness beyond ligation and excision alone. Occlusive effectiveness appears to be further improved by combining FI with cautery. Methodologically sound prospective controlled studies should be conducted to evaluate specific occlusion techniques further.

          Related collections

          Most cited references58

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel group randomized trials

          To comprehend the results of a randomized controlled trial (RCT), readers must understand its design, conduct, analysis and interpretation. That goal can only be achieved through complete transparency from authors. Despite several decades of educational efforts, the reporting of RCTs needs improvement. Investigators and editors developed the original CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement to help authors improve reporting by using a checklist and flow diagram. The revised CONSORT statement presented in this paper incorporates new evidence and addresses some criticisms of the original statement. The checklist items pertain to the content of the Title, Abstract, Introduction, Methods, Results and Discussion. The revised checklist includes 22-items selected because empirical evidence indicates that not reporting the information is associated with biasedestimates of treatment effect or the information is essential to judge the reliability or relevance of the findings. We intended the flow diagram to depict the passage of participants through an RCT. The revised flow diagram depicts information from four stages of a trial (enrolment, intervention allocation, follow-up, and analysis). The diagram explicitly includes the number of participants, for each intervention group, included in the primary data analysis. Inclusion of these numbers allows the reader to judge whether the authors have performed an intention-to-treat analysis. In sum, the CONSORT statement is intended to improve the reporting of an RCT, enabling readers to understand a trial's conduct and to assess the validity of its results.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Safety and effectiveness of vasectomy.

            To recommend further research on vasectomy based on a systematic review of the effectiveness and safety of vasectomy. A systematic MEDLINE review of the literature on the safety and effectiveness of vasectomy between 1964 and 1998. Early failure rates are <1%; however, effectiveness and complications vary with experience of surgeons and surgical technique. Early complications, including hematoma, infection, sperm granulomas, epididymitis-orchitis, and congestive epididymitis, occur in 1%-6% of men undergoing vasectomy. Incidence of epididymal pain is poorly documented. Animal and human data indicate that vasectomy does not increase atherosclerosis and that increases in circulating immune complexes after vasectomy are transient in men with vasectomies. The weight of the evidence regarding prostate and testicular cancer suggests that men with vasectomy are not at increased risk of these cancers. Publications to date continue to support the conclusion that vasectomy is a highly effective form of contraception. Future studies should include evaluations of the long-term effectiveness of vasectomy, evaluating criteria for postvasectomy discontinuation of alternative contraception for use in settings where semen analysis is not practical, and characterizing complications including chronic epididymal pain syndrome.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The no-scalpel vasectomy.

              A refined method of delivering the vas deferens for vasectomy has been developed and used in China since 1974. This method eliminates the scalpel, results in fewer hematomas and infections, and leaves a smaller wound than conventional techniques. An extracutaneous fixation ring clamp encircles and firmly secures the vas without penetrating the skin. A sharp curved hemostat punctures and dilates the scrotal skin and vas sheath. The vas is delivered, cleaned and occluded by the surgeon's preferred technique. The contralateral vas is delivered through the same opening. The puncture wound contracts to about 2 mm., is not visible to the man and requires no sutures for closure. The reported incidence of hematoma in 179,741 men followed in China was 0.09%. No hematomas or infections were identified in the first 273 procedures performed by a surgeon in the United States. The operating time in China and for the last 50 United States procedures has ranged from 5 to 11 minutes. The disadvantage of the technique is the hand-on training and number of cases necessary to gain proficiency. However, the advantages for surgeons and patients should enhance the popularity of vasectomy.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMC Med
                BMC Medicine
                BioMed Central (London )
                1741-7015
                2004
                24 May 2004
                : 2
                : 21
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Clinical and Evaluative Research Unit Saint-François D'Assise Hospital, Centre hospitalier universitaire de Québec (CHUQ), 10 rue de l'Espinay, D1-724, Quebec City (QC), Canada G1L 3L5
                [2 ]EngenderHealth, New York, NY 10001, USA
                Article
                1741-7015-2-21
                10.1186/1741-7015-2-21
                428590
                15157272
                8975980f-dc6c-48f0-9548-ee237377cbd3
                Copyright © 2004 Labrecque et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article: verbatim copying and redistribution of this article are permitted in all media for any purpose, provided this notice is preserved along with the article's original URL.
                History
                : 18 November 2003
                : 24 May 2004
                Categories
                Research Article

                Medicine
                Medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article