-
Fertility and Sterility May 2000To recommend further research on vasectomy based on a systematic review of the effectiveness and safety of vasectomy. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To recommend further research on vasectomy based on a systematic review of the effectiveness and safety of vasectomy.
DESIGN
A systematic MEDLINE review of the literature on the safety and effectiveness of vasectomy between 1964 and 1998.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)
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.
CONCLUSION(S)
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.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Contraindications; Counseling; Humans; MEDLINE; Male; Prostatic Neoplasms; Testicular Neoplasms; United States; Vasectomy; Vasovasostomy
PubMed: 10785217
DOI: 10.1016/s0015-0282(00)00482-9 -
Urology Apr 2015To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the published literature evaluating vasovasostomy for vasectomy reversal outcomes. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the published literature evaluating vasovasostomy for vasectomy reversal outcomes.
METHODS
We conducted a review of English language articles describing results of microscopic vasovasostomy for vasectomy reversal. Two reviewers independently examined the studies for eligibility and evaluated data from each study. Meta-analysis was performed using a random effects model.
RESULTS
Thirty-one studies with 6633 patients met inclusion criteria. Mean patient age at time of vasectomy reversal was 38.9 years with a mean obstructive interval of 7.2 years. The mean postprocedure patency and pregnancy rates weighted by sample size were 89.4% and 73.0%, respectively. A meta-analysis comparing an obstructive interval (OI) of <10 years to an OI of at least 10 years duration produced a pooled incidence ratios (IR; meta-IR) of 1.17 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09-1.25) for patency and 1.24 (95% CI, 1.12-1.38) for pregnancy. Incidence of patency for modified 1-layer technique was similar to that after a 2-layer procedure with a meta-IR of 1.04 (95% CI, 1.00-1.08). Because of a small number of relevant studies, a meta-analysis for other predictors of success such as sperm granuloma, quality of vasal fluid, and female factors was not feasible.
CONCLUSION
We found no statistically significant difference in vasovasostomy outcomes when comparing the impact of single vs multilayer anastomoses. Patients with an OI <10 years showed higher patency and pregnancy rates compared with those with an OI ≥10 years. Uniform definitions of patency are necessary to characterize success and standardize outcome reporting.
Topics: Female; Humans; Male; Microsurgery; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Rate; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome; Vasovasostomy
PubMed: 25817104
DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2014.12.023 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2021Varicoceles are associated with male subfertility; however, the mechanisms by which varicoceles affect fertility have yet to be satisfactorily explained. Several... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Varicoceles are associated with male subfertility; however, the mechanisms by which varicoceles affect fertility have yet to be satisfactorily explained. Several treatment options exist, including surgical or radiological treatment, however the safest and most efficient treatment remains unclear. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of surgical and radiological treatment of varicoceles on live birth rate, adverse events, pregnancy rate, varicocele recurrence, and quality of life amongst couples where the adult male has a varicocele, and the female partner of childbearing age has no fertility problems.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases on 4 April 2020: the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL. We also searched the trial registries and reference lists of articles.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) if they were relevant to the clinical question posed and compared different forms of surgical ligation, different forms of radiological treatments, surgical treatment compared to radiological treatment, or one of these aforementioned treatment forms compared to non-surgical methods, delayed treatment, or no treatment. We extracted data if the studies reported on live birth, adverse events, pregnancy, varicocele recurrence, and quality of life.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Screening of abstracts and full-text publications, alongside data extraction and 'Risk of bias' assessment, were done dually using the Covidence software. When we had sufficient data, we calculated random-effects (Mantel-Haenszel) meta-analyses; otherwise, we reported results narratively. We used the I statistic to analyse statistical heterogeneity. We planned to use funnel plots to assess publication bias in meta-analyses with at least 10 included studies. We dually rated the risk of bias of studies using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool, and the certainty of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified 1897 citations after de-duplicating the search results. We excluded 1773 during title and abstract screening. From the 113 new full texts assessed in addition to the 10 studies (11 references) included in the previous version of this review, we included 38 new studies, resulting in a total of 48 studies (59 references) in the review providing data for 5384 participants. Two studies (three references) are ongoing studies and two studies are awaiting classification. Treatment versus non-surgical, non-radiological, delayed, or no treatment Two studies comparing surgical or radiological treatment versus no treatment reported on live birth with differing directions of effect. As a result, we are uncertain whether surgical or radiological treatment improves live birth rates when compared to no treatment (risk ratio (RR) 2.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.19 to 26.93; 2 RCTs, N = 204; I = 74%, very low-certainty evidence). Treatment may improve pregnancy rates compared to delayed or no treatment (RR 1.55, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.26; 13 RCTs, N = 1193; I = 65%, low-certainty evidence). This suggests that couples with no or delayed treatment have a 21% chance of pregnancy, whilst the pregnancy rate after surgical or radiological treatment is between 22% and 48%. We identified no evidence on adverse events, varicocele recurrence, or quality of life for this comparison. Surgical versus radiological treatment We are uncertain about the effect of surgical versus radiological treatment on live birth and on the following adverse events: hydrocele formation, pain, epididymitis, haematoma, and suture granuloma. We are uncertain about the effect of surgical versus radiological treatment on pregnancy rate (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.70; 5 RCTs, N = 456, low-certainty evidence) and varicocele recurrence (RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.82 to 2.08; 3 RCTs, N = 380, low-certainty evidence). We identified no evidence on quality of life for this comparison. Surgery versus other surgical treatment We identified 19 studies comparing microscopic subinguinal surgical treatment to any other surgical treatment. Microscopic subinguinal surgical treatment probably improves pregnancy rates slightly compared to other surgical treatments (RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.36; 12 RCTs, N = 1473, moderate-certainty evidence). This suggests that couples with microscopic subinguinal surgical treatment have a 10% to 14% chance of pregnancy after treatment, whilst the pregnancy rate in couples after other surgical treatments is 10%. This procedure also probably reduces the risk of varicocele recurrence (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.29, 0.79; 14 RCTs, N = 1565, moderate-certainty evidence). This suggests that 0.4% to 1.1% of men undergoing microscopic subinguinal surgical treatment experience recurrent varicocele, whilst 1.4% of men undergoing other surgical treatments do. Results for the following adverse events were inconclusive: hydrocele formation, haematoma, abdominal distension, testicular atrophy, wound infection, scrotal pain, and oedema. We identified no evidence on live birth or quality of life for this comparison. Nine studies compared open inguinal surgical treatment to retroperitoneal surgical treatment. Due to small sample sizes and methodological limitations, we identified neither treatment type as superior or inferior to the other regarding adverse events, pregnancy rates, or varicocele recurrence. We identified no evidence on live birth or quality of life for this comparison. Radiological versus other radiological treatment One study compared two types of radiological treatment (sclerotherapy versus embolisation) and reported 13% varicocele recurrence in both groups. Due to the broad confidence interval, no valid conclusion could be drawn (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.16 to 6.20; 1 RCT, N = 30, very low-certainty evidence). We identified no evidence on live birth, adverse events, pregnancy, or quality of life for this comparison.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Based on the limited evidence, it remains uncertain whether any treatment (surgical or radiological) compared to no treatment in subfertile men may be of benefit on live birth rates; however, treatment may improve the chances for pregnancy. The evidence was also insufficient to determine whether surgical treatment was superior to radiological treatment. However, microscopic subinguinal surgical treatment probably improves pregnancy rates and reduces the risk of varicocele recurrence compared to other surgical treatments. High-quality, head-to-head comparative RCTs focusing on live birth rate and also assessing adverse events and quality of life are warranted.
Topics: Bias; Confidence Intervals; Embolization, Therapeutic; Female; Humans; Infertility, Male; Live Birth; Male; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Postoperative Complications; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Rate; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Recurrence; Sclerotherapy; Sperm Count; Testicular Hydrocele; Varicocele
PubMed: 33890288
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000479.pub6