Simplifying vasectomy reversal without compromising outcomes: a single-surgeon series.

Abstract

In vasovasostomy (VV) surgery, the micro-surgical technique has consistently been shown to provide superior outcomes to both macroscopic and loupe-assisted techniques, with large studies showing overall patency rates of ~86% and pregnancy rates of ~52%. However, the question of whether a single- or double-layer anastomosis offers the best outcomes remains contentious, and despite the popularity of the two-layer technique, a meta-analysis suggests little difference in outcomes. This study records the outcomes of a single-surgeon series of a simplified single-layer technique, along with the comparative outcomes and predictive factors. A retrospective analysis of 237 consecutive patients undergoing microsurgical vasectomy reversal between 2010 and 2022 in a single institution was performed. A microsurgical, single-layer, six-point, 8-0 nylon anastomosis was performed with macroscopic intra-operative assessment of vasal fluid. An ipsilateral vasoepididymostomy (VE) was only performed in cases of complete absence of vasal fluid or the presence of toothpaste-like discharge (bilateral VE were excluded from this series). Semen analysis was performed 3 months postoperatively to assess for the presence of motile sperm. A total of 237 men underwent microsurgical vasectomy reversal over a 12-year period. The median age of men at vasectomy was 34 years. The median age at vasectomy reversal was 42 years. The median obstructive interval was 7.3 years. An overall patency rate of 85.8% was achieved (motile sperm present), with 53.8% having a sperm count greater than 15 million/mL on initial 3-month assessment. For obstructive intervals of <3, 3-8, 9-14, and ≥15 years, there were declining patency rates of 96.3%, 90.5%, 80.0%, and 74.1%, respectively (P=0.04). These are the equivalent outcomes to published high-volume two-layer studies. We found no difference between patency rates of VV performed on the straight vas vs. the convoluted vas, and no difference when only one side could be re-anastomosed (20 patients). Using a micro-surgical technique in high volume, similar outcomes can be achieved from a simplified single-layer VV technique with fewer sutures, as compared to the more complex two-layer techniques described. We postulate that this may be due to reduced ischaemia relating to fewer sutures and less tissue-handling. Given the associated time and cost savings, as well as the easier learning curve involved, we would advocate the use of this technique in routine VV practise.