[Desire to Have Children After Vasectomy : Vasectomy Reversal or Assisted Reproductive Technology?]

Overview

Journal Urologie

Specialty Urology

Date 2024 Oct 16

PMID 39414715

Authors

Armin Soave

Sabine Kliesch

Jann-Frederik Cremers

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

The vasectomy is a safe and effective method of contraception for men. Up to 6% of men who underwent vasectomy have a renewed child wish. Microsurgical vasectomy reversal (VR) in men, microsurgical epididymal sperm aspiration (MESA), or testicular sperm extraction (TESE) in men plus assisted reproductive technology (ART) in the female partner as well as the combination of VR and MESA/TESE plus ART represent established therapeutic strategies. Various factors may impact the success of VR, as defined by patency and pregnancy rate following VR, including the female partner's age, the obstructive interval, and the surgical VR technique. There is no difference in the pregnancy and live birth rate following VR or MESA/TESE plus ART. However, following MESA/TESE plus ART, time to pregnancy is shorter compared with VR. Overall, VR is more cost-effective than MESA/TESE plus ART and allows for a lower therapeutic burden, especially in the female partner. In addition, VR combined with TESE plus-if necessary-ART is more cost-effective than MESA/TESE plus ART alone, even in female partners with advanced age. For successful counseling regarding the different therapy options for a renewed child wish after vasectomy, it is important to evaluate the underlying individual situation of the couple.

References

Silber S, Grotjan H . Microscopic vasectomy reversal 30 years later: a summary of 4010 cases by the same surgeon. J Androl. 2004; 25(6):845-59. DOI: 10.1002/j.1939-4640.2004.tb03150.x. View

Silber S . Microscopic technique for reversal of vasectomy. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1976; 143(4):631. View

Oesterwitz H . [45 years of microsurgery in urology : Contemporary witnesses report with special reference to vasectomy reversal]. Urologe A. 2020; 59(12):1523-1540. DOI: 10.1007/s00120-020-01292-9. View

Dickey R, Pastuszak A, Hakky T, Chandrashekar A, Ramasamy R, Lipshultz L . The evolution of vasectomy reversal. Curr Urol Rep. 2015; 16(6):40. DOI: 10.1007/s11934-015-0511-0. View

Goldstein M, Li P, Matthews G . Microsurgical vasovasostomy: the microdot technique of precision suture placement. J Urol. 1997; 159(1):188-90. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-5347(01)64053-9. View

Thomas Jr A . Vasoepididymostomy. Urol Clin North Am. 1987; 14(3):527-38. View

Chan P . The evolution and refinement of vasoepididymostomy techniques. Asian J Androl. 2012; 15(1):49-55. PMC: 3739129. DOI: 10.1038/aja.2012.80. View

Namekawa T, Imamoto T, Kato M, Komiya A, Ichikawa T . Vasovasostomy and vasoepididymostomy: Review of the procedures, outcomes, and predictors of patency and pregnancy over the last decade. Reprod Med Biol. 2018; 17(4):343-355. PMC: 6194271. DOI: 10.1002/rmb2.12207. View

Schwarzer J . Vasectomy reversal using a microsurgical three-layer technique: one surgeon's experience over 18 years with 1300 patients. Int J Androl. 2012; 35(5):706-13. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2605.2012.01270.x. View

10.

Belker A, Thomas Aj Jr , Fuchs E, Konnak J, Sharlip I . Results of 1,469 microsurgical vasectomy reversals by the Vasovasostomy Study Group. J Urol Nurs. 1992; 11(2):93-111. View

11.

Schwarzer J, Steinfatt H . Refertilization surgery. A surgeon's experience of over 27 years with nearly 2000 patients. Minerva Urol Nefrol. 2014; 66(4):203-11. View

12.

Seth I, Gibson D, Bulloch G, Joseph K, Cevik J, Qin K . Vasovasostomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing macroscopic, microsurgical, and robot-assisted microsurgical techniques. Andrology. 2023; 12(4):740-767. DOI: 10.1111/andr.13543. View

13.

Schwarzer J, Steinfatt H . Current status of vasectomy reversal. Nat Rev Urol. 2013; 10(4):195-205. DOI: 10.1038/nrurol.2013.14. View

14.

Fuchs M, Anderson R, Ostrowski K, Brant W, Fuchs E . Pre-operative risk factors associated with need for vasoepididymostomy at the time of vasectomy reversal. Andrology. 2015; 4(1):160-2. DOI: 10.1111/andr.12139. View

15.

Dcunha R, Hussein R, Ananda H, Kumari S, Adiga S, Kannan N . Current Insights and Latest Updates in Sperm Motility and Associated Applications in Assisted Reproduction. Reprod Sci. 2020; 29(1):7-25. PMC: 7721202. DOI: 10.1007/s43032-020-00408-y. View

16.

Yang G, Walsh T, Shefi S, Turek P . The kinetics of the return of motile sperm to the ejaculate after vasectomy reversal. J Urol. 2007; 177(6):2272-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2007.01.158. View

17.

Farber N, Flannigan R, Li P, Li P, Goldstein M . The Kinetics of Sperm Return and Late Failure Following Vasovasostomy or Vasoepididymostomy: A Systematic Review. J Urol. 2018; 201(2):241-250. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2018.07.092. View

18.

Farber N, Flannigan R, Srivastava A, Wang H, Goldstein M . Vasovasostomy: kinetics and predictors of patency. Fertil Steril. 2020; 113(4):774-780.e3. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2019.11.032. View

19.

Nusbaum D, Marks S, Marks M, Burrows P, Zollman R, Samplaski M . The Effect of Male Age Over 50 Years on Vasectomy Reversal Outcomes. Urology. 2020; 145:134-140. DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2020.04.141. View

20.

Samplaski M, Rodman J, Perry J, Marks M, Zollman R, Asanad K . Sperm granulomas: Predictive factors and impacts on patency post vasectomy reversal. Andrologia. 2022; 54(7):e14439. PMC: 9541413. DOI: 10.1111/and.14439. View