These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Pregnancy after vasovasostomy for vasectomy reversal: a study of factors affecting long-term return of fertility in 282 patients followed for 10 years.
    Author: Silber SJ.
    Journal: Hum Reprod; 1989 Apr; 4(3):318-22. PubMed ID: 2715309.
    Abstract:
    The aim of this study was to determine the eventual fertility of those patients following vasectomy reversal who have no pressure-induced secondary epididymal blockage. These patients underwent simple vasovasostomy because at the time of the reversal surgery there were sperm present in large numbers in the vas fluid. It was possible to obtain long-term follow-up on 326 early patients who underwent vasectomy reversal 8-10 years ago. Two hundred and eighty-two of those patients had sperm in the vas fluid. These patients were studied for pregnancy rate and post-operative semen parameters in relation to presence or absence of sperm in the vas fluid at the time of vasectomy reversal, duration of time since vasectomy, pre-operative serum antisperm antibody titers, the influence of varicocoele and quantitative evaluation of testicular biopsy. All of the 44 patients with no sperm in the vas fluid remained azoospermic following vasovasostomy. Of the 282 patients with sperm in the vas fluid, 228 (81%) eventually impregnated their wives. Twenty-four patients with sperm in the vas fluid (9%) were azoospermic and did not impregnate their wives. Of the 258 patients who had sperm patency, the pregnancy rate was 88%. The number of mature spermatids per tubule in the testis correlated closely with the post-operative sperm count in patent cases. Quantitative evaluation of the testicular biopsy revealed normal spermatogenesis, even in patients with azoospermia or severe oligospermia post-operatively. Technical failures were due to blockage either at the vasovasostomy site, or epididymal blockage unrecognized at the time of vasovasostomy.2+perm count had a minimal impact on the
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]