Urology · 2006
An implantable ligation device that achieves male sterilization without cutting the vas deferens.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kirby David, Utz William J, Parks Patrick J
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To determine whether the Vasclip implant procedure would (a) be equivalent to vasectomy in producing azoospermia, (b) produce greater patient satisfaction postoperatively, and (c) result in lower complication rates, postoperative pain, hematoma formation, spermatic granuloma, and surgical site infection when compared with historical controls.
METHODS: Sterilization and complications were studied in 124 consecutive patients.
RESULTS: Successful sterilization, defined by azoospermia at 10 to 14 months, was observed in 116 of 119 subjects. The effectiveness seemed to be equivalent to that of vasectomy. The incidence of postoperative pain and hematoma formation was similar to that with standard methods. The Vasclip procedure had similar infection rates and seemed to have lower rates of sperm granuloma when compared with vasectomy. In 3 subjects with persistent presence of sperm, histologic examination after traditional vasectomy indicated that misalignment of the device led to partial vas incision with recanalization. Patient acceptability was high: of the clinical study patients, 99% of survey respondents would recommend that other men considering a vasectomy have the Vasclip procedure.
CONCLUSIONS: The Vasclip implant procedure represents a new, effective, office-based alternative to vasectomy. Physicians' benefits can include reduced procedural time and reduction of postprocedural complications. Potential patients' benefits include reduced risk of postoperative infection and sperm granuloma formation.
METHODS: Sterilization and complications were studied in 124 consecutive patients.
RESULTS: Successful sterilization, defined by azoospermia at 10 to 14 months, was observed in 116 of 119 subjects. The effectiveness seemed to be equivalent to that of vasectomy. The incidence of postoperative pain and hematoma formation was similar to that with standard methods. The Vasclip procedure had similar infection rates and seemed to have lower rates of sperm granuloma when compared with vasectomy. In 3 subjects with persistent presence of sperm, histologic examination after traditional vasectomy indicated that misalignment of the device led to partial vas incision with recanalization. Patient acceptability was high: of the clinical study patients, 99% of survey respondents would recommend that other men considering a vasectomy have the Vasclip procedure.
CONCLUSIONS: The Vasclip implant procedure represents a new, effective, office-based alternative to vasectomy. Physicians' benefits can include reduced procedural time and reduction of postprocedural complications. Potential patients' benefits include reduced risk of postoperative infection and sperm granuloma formation.