VAZEKTOMİ EREKTİL FONKSİYONU VE YAŞAM KALİTESİNİ ETKİLİYOR MU?

Giriş: No-scalpel vazektomi dünyada en yaygın kullanılan standart vazektomi tekniğidir. Bizim amacımız vazektomi ve re-vazektominin erektil fonksiyon ve yaşam kalitesi üzerindeki etkisinini araştırmaktır. Gereç ve Yöntem: İkiyüzoniki adet vazektomi hastası değerlendirildi. Hastalar vazektomi gününde, 3.ay, 6.ay ve 12. aylık kontrollerinde valide edilmiş SF-36 ve İİEF sorgulama formlarıyla değerlendirildi. Komplikasyon açısında ilk 7 günde hastalar değerlendirildi. Altıncı ay kontrol spermiyogramında motil sperm görülen hastalara revazektomi uygulandı. Bulgular: Ortalama İİEF skorunda istatiksel anlamlı artış tespit edilirken (p < 0.05) ortalama SF-36 subskalasında herhangi bir fark görülmedi ( p > 0.05).Re-vazektomi grubunda İİEF skorlarında ve SF-36 subskalasında istatiksel anlamlı fark görülmedi (p > 0.05).Altıncı ay kontrollerinde motil sperm görülen 18 hastanın 12’ne re-vazektomi uygulandı,6 hasta ameliyatı kabul etmedigi için çalışma dışı bırakıldı. Vazektomi grubunda 186 hasta prospektif olarak değerlendirildi. Sadece 1(0.45%) hastada hematom görüldü. Sonuç: Bizim sonuçlarımızda vazektominin erektil fonksiyon üzerinde pozitif etkisi görüldü. Bununla birlikte revazektominin erektil fonksiyon ve yaşam kalitesi üzerine herhangi pozitif veya negatif etkisi tespit edilmedi.

DOES VASECTOMY AFFECT ERECTILE FUNCTIONS AND QUALITY OF LIFE?

Introduction: The no-scalpel vasectomy is the most common standard vasectomy technique worldwide. Weaimed to evaluate the effects of vasectomy and re-vasectomy on erectile function and life quality.Materials and Methods: Two hundred and twelve consecutive vasectomy patients were evaluated. ValidatedSF-36 and IIEF assessment questionnaires were completed for the patients at the day of vasectomy and during3rd, 6th, and 12th month controls. Patients were evaluated for complications within the first 7 days. Re-vasectomywas performed when motile sperms were detected at the 6th month control spermiogram.Results: The mean IIEF scores showed a significant increase (p < 0.05), whereas the mean SF-36 subscales didnot show any difference (p > 0.05). In the re-vasectomy group, no statistically significant difference was detectedbetween the mean values of IIEF scores and SF-36 subscales (p > 0.05). Of the 18 patients having motile sperms atthe 6th month control, 12 were performed re-vasectomy, while 6 did not accept re-operation and were excluded. 186patients were prospectively evaluated in the vasectomy group. Only 1 (0.45%) patient had hematoma.Conclusion: Our results showed the positive effect of vasectomy on erectile function. Also, re-vasectomy had noadditional positive or negative effects on erectile function and quality of life.

PDF

___

1. Miller WB, Shain RN, Pasta DJ . Tubal sterilization or vasectomy: how do married couples make the choice? Fertil Steril 1991; 56(2): 278-84.
2. Li SQ, Goldstein M, Zhu J, Huber D. The no-scalpel vasectomy. J Urol 1991; 145(2): 341-4.
3. Weiss RS, Li PS. No-needle jet anesthetic technique for no-scalpel vasectomy. J Urol 2005; 173(5):1677-80.
4. Trussell J, Lalla AM, Doan QV, Reyes E, Pinto L, Gricar J. Cost effectiveness of contraceptives in the United States. Contraception 2009; 79(1): 5-14.
5. Hemingway H, Stafford M, Stansfeld S, Shipley M, Marmot M. Is the SF-36 a valid measure of change in population health? Results from the Whitehall II Study. BMJ 1997; 315(7118):1273-9.
6. Rosen RC, Riley A, Wagner G, Osterloh IH, Kirkpatrick J, Mishra A. The international index of erectile function (IIEF): a multidimensional scale for assessment of erectile dysfunction. Urology 1997; 49(6):822-30.
7. Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 1992;30(6):473-83.
8. Li PS, Li SQ, Schlegel PN, Goldstein M . External spermatic sheath injection for vasal nerve block. Urology 1992;39(2):173- 6.
9. No-scalpel vasectomy an Illustrated Guide for Surgeon.3rd ed.New York: Engender Health;2003.
10. Holt BA, Higgins AF. Minimally invasive vasectomy. Br J Urol 1996;77(4):585-6.
11. Sokal DC, McMullen S, Gates D, Dominik R . A comparative study of the no scalpel and standard incision approaches to vasectomy in 5 countries. The Male Sterilization Investigator Team 1999; 162(5):1621-5.
12. Nirapathpongporn A, Huber DH, Krieger JN . No-scalpel vasectomy at the King's birthday vasectomy festival. Lancet 1990; 14(335): 894-5.
13. Manikandan R, Srirangam SJ, Pearson E, Collins GN. Early and late morbidity after vasectomy: a comparison of chronic scrotal pain at 1 and 10 years. BJU Int 2004;93(4):571-4.
14. Myers SA, Mershon CE, Fuchs EF. Vasectomy reversal for treatment of the post-vasectomy pain syndrome. J Urol 1997;157(2):518-20.
15. Schmidt SS . Vasectomy by section, luminal fulguration and fascial interposition: results from 6248 cases. Br J Urol 1995; 76(3):373-4; discussion 375.
16. McMahon AJ, Buckley J, Taylor A, Lloyd SN, Deane RF, Kirk D . Chronic testicular pain following vasectomy. Br J Urol 1992;69(2):188-91.
17. Sharlip ID, Belker AM, Honig S, Labrecque M, Marmar JL, Ross LS et al. American Urological Association . Vasectomy: AUA guideline. J Urol. 2012; 188(6 Suppl):2482-91.
18. Kendrick JS, Gonzales B, Huber DH, Grubb GS, Rubin GL. Complications of vasectomies in the United States. J Fam Pract 1987;25(3):245-8.
19. Barone MA, Nazerali H, Cortes M, Chen-Mok M, Pollack AE, Sokal D. A prospective study of time and number of ejaculations to azoospermia after vasectomy by ligation and excision. J Urol 2003;170(3):892-6.
20. Barone MA, Irsula B, Chen-Mok M, Sokal DC; Investigator study group . Effectiveness of vasectomy using cautery.BMC Urol 2004;19;4:10.
21. Belker AM, Sexter MS, Sweitzer SJ, Raff MJ . The high rate of noncompliance for post-vasectomy semen examination: medical and legal considerations. J Urol 1990; 144(2 Pt 1): 284-6.
22. Schwingl PJ, Guess HA. Safety and effectiveness of vasectomy. Fertil Steril 2000; 73(5): 923-36.
23. Hendry WF . Vasectomy and vasectomy reversal. Br J Urol 1994; 73(4): 337-44.
24. Goldacre MJ, Holford TR, Vessey MP . Cardiovascular disease and vasectomy. Findings from two epidemiologic studies. N Engl J Med 1983; 308(14): 805-8.
25. Rosenberg L, Schwingl PJ, Kaufman DW, Helmrich SP, Palmer JR, Shapiro S . The risk of myocardial infarction 10 or more years after vasectomy in men under 55 years of age. Am J Epidemiol 1986; 123(6): 1049-56.
26. Coady SA, Sharrett AR, Zheng ZJ, Evans GW, Heiss G.Vasectomy,inflammation, atherosclerosis and long-term followup for cardiovascular diseases: no associations in the atherosclerosis risk in communities study. J Urol 2002; 167(1): 204-7.
27. Manson JE, Ridker PM, Spelsberg A, Ajani U, Lotufo PA, Hennekens CH . Vasectomy and subsequent cardiovascular disease in US physicians. Contraception 1999; 59(3):181-6.
28. Lesko SM, Louik C, Vezina R, Rosenberg L, Shapiro S . Vasectomy and prostate cancer. J Urol 1999; 161(6): 1848-52; discussion 1852-3.
29. Dennis LK, Dawson DV, Resnick MI . Vasectomy and the risk of prostate cancer: a meta-analysis examining vasectomy status, age at vasectomy, and time since vasectomy. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2002; 5(3): 193-203.
30. Møller H, Knudsen LB, Lynge E . Risk of testicular cancer after vasectomy: cohort study of over 73,000 men. BMJ 1994; 309(6950): 295-9.
31. Rosenberg L, Palmer JR, Zauber AG, Warshauer ME, Strom BL, Harlap S et al. The relation of vasectomy to the risk of cancer. Am J Epidemiol 1994; 140(5): 431-8.
32. Buchholz NP, Weuste R, Mattarelli G, Woessmer B, Langewitz W . Post-vasectomy erectile dysfunction. J Psychosom Res 1994; 38(7): 759-62.
33. Rhoden EL, Telöken C, Sogari PR, Vargas Souto CA .The use of the simplified International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) as a diagnostic tool to study the prevalence of erectile dysfunction. Int J Impot Res 2002; 14(4): 245-50.