The Effect of Male Age Over 50 Years on Vasectomy Reversal Outcomes

[Desire to have children after vasectomy : Vasectomy reversal or assisted reproductive technology?]

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.

Sperm granulomas: Predictive factors and impacts on patency post vasectomy reversal

The objective of this study was to identify factors that predict for sperm granuloma formation and the impact of sperm granuloma presence and quantity on vasectomy reversal (VR) outcomes. A cross sectional retrospective review of prospectively collected data, on the impact of granuloma on VR outcomes from a single academic center was performed. The impact of age, obstructive interval, intraoperative vasal fluid findings, anastomosis type, body mass index, tobacco use and total motile count (TMC) was determined. A total of 1550 men underwent VR between January 2000 and August 2019. Granulomas were present unilaterally in 23.3% (n = 361) and bilaterally in 14.2% (n = 220). On univariate analysis, increasing patient age negatively correlated with a larger number of granulomas (p = .011). Granuloma presence was associated with finding intact and motile sperm from the vasal stump intraoperatively (p = .001), and vasoepididymostomy anastomosis (p < .001). However, granuloma presence (and quantity) did not correlate with obstructive interval or maximum TMC. Tobacco use and body mass index (BMI) were not associated with granuloma presence. On multivariate analysis, granuloma quantity was not associated with TMC. Obstructive interval and vasovasostomy anastomosis were associated with higher TMC, while BMI was negatively associated with TMC. In conclusion, increasing age was negatively correlated with granuloma formation. Granuloma presence was associated with more favourable intraoperative fluid findings and anastomosis type, but not post-VR TMC, suggesting men with and without granulomas undergoing skilled microsurgery will have similar patency rates. Heavier men should be encouraged for weight loss prior to vasectomy reversal as increasing BMI was associated with lower TMC.

Vasectomy reversal vs. sperm retrieval with in vitro fertilization: a contemporary, comparative analysis

OBJECTIVE

To explore the primary options available to men who desire fertility after a vasectomy.

DESIGN

Literature review.

SETTING

University of Miami Miller School of Medicine.

PATIENT(S)

Men with a previous vasectomy now seeking fertility.

INTERVENTION(S)

The two main options to achieve paternity for men following vasectomy include vasectomy reversal (VR) and surgical sperm retrieval with subsequent in vitro fertilization (IVF).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

We reviewed and compared the important considerations for men deciding between these 2 options, including: obstructive interval, female partner age, antisperm antibodies, male partner age, female infertility factors, and cost.

RESULT(S)

Both VR and IVF represent reasonable options for the couple seeking fertility after vasectomy. Specific circumstances may favor one modality over another, depending on obstructive interval, possible female fertility factors, female partner age, male partner age, and cost. In the absence of insurance coverage, VR is often more cost-effective than IVF. Alternatively, when a female factor may contribute to infertility in addition to vasectomy, IVF is often the better choice. Antisperm antibodies are unlikely to contribute to infertility following a successful VR.

CONCLUSION(S)

VR or surgical sperm retrieval with IVF are reasonable options for couples seeking children after vasectomy. Pregnancy rates for both options are overall similar, so prior to pursuing either option, a thorough discussion with a reproductive urologist who possesses microsurgical skills in VR and a reproductive endocrinologist with expertise in IVF is imperative. Making a final choice through shared decision-making while considering these points is ideal.