输精管切除术组织学:它还有用吗?

IF 1.4 Q3 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY Archivio Italiano di Urologia e Andrologia Pub Date : 2024-10-02 DOI:10.4081/aiua.2024.12682
Anthony Sim, Panagiotis Nikolinakos, Konstantinos Charitopoulos, Ivo Donkov, Samuel Bishara
{"title":"输精管切除术组织学:它还有用吗?","authors":"Anthony Sim, Panagiotis Nikolinakos, Konstantinos Charitopoulos, Ivo Donkov, Samuel Bishara","doi":"10.4081/aiua.2024.12682","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To determine if histological evaluation of the vasa is useful when post-vasectomy semen analysis (PVSA) compliance is low and to determine whether compliance could be predicted.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective evaluation of patients undergoing vasectomy between 2018 and 2022 was undertaken. A comparison of the PVSA between three vasa histological categorisations was made: complete divisions, incomplete division(s), absent vas(a). A multivariate model was constructed to predict PVSA compliance.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From 388 patients, 191 (49.2%) undertook PVSA. Four patients had a revision of vasectomy. On 3 occasions this was due to the histology findings and once from semen analysis with normal histology. There was no significant difference in the number of azoospermic samples (95.4% vs 91.2%, ns), of samples with presence of Rare Non-Motile Sperm (RNMS) (2.6% vs 8.8%, ns) and those with sperm present (2.0 vs 0%, ns), between patients with complete division of the vasa on both sides and those with incomplete division on one side respectively. There was no difference in patient characteristics between those who complied with PVSA and those who did not.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This paper suggests that there is a role for histological evaluation of the vasa when PVSA compliance is poor. Incompletely divided vasa on histology are not associated with an adverse PVSA.</p>","PeriodicalId":46900,"journal":{"name":"Archivio Italiano di Urologia e Andrologia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Vasectomy histology: Is it still useful?\",\"authors\":\"Anthony Sim, Panagiotis Nikolinakos, Konstantinos Charitopoulos, Ivo Donkov, Samuel Bishara\",\"doi\":\"10.4081/aiua.2024.12682\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To determine if histological evaluation of the vasa is useful when post-vasectomy semen analysis (PVSA) compliance is low and to determine whether compliance could be predicted.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective evaluation of patients undergoing vasectomy between 2018 and 2022 was undertaken. A comparison of the PVSA between three vasa histological categorisations was made: complete divisions, incomplete division(s), absent vas(a). A multivariate model was constructed to predict PVSA compliance.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From 388 patients, 191 (49.2%) undertook PVSA. Four patients had a revision of vasectomy. On 3 occasions this was due to the histology findings and once from semen analysis with normal histology. There was no significant difference in the number of azoospermic samples (95.4% vs 91.2%, ns), of samples with presence of Rare Non-Motile Sperm (RNMS) (2.6% vs 8.8%, ns) and those with sperm present (2.0 vs 0%, ns), between patients with complete division of the vasa on both sides and those with incomplete division on one side respectively. There was no difference in patient characteristics between those who complied with PVSA and those who did not.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This paper suggests that there is a role for histological evaluation of the vasa when PVSA compliance is poor. Incompletely divided vasa on histology are not associated with an adverse PVSA.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46900,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Archivio Italiano di Urologia e Andrologia\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Archivio Italiano di Urologia e Andrologia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2024.12682\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archivio Italiano di Urologia e Andrologia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2024.12682","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的确定在输精管结扎术后精液分析(PVSA)依从性较低时,对输精管进行组织学评估是否有用,并确定是否可以预测依从性:对2018年至2022年间接受输精管切除术的患者进行回顾性评估。比较了三种输精管组织学分类之间的 PVSA:完全分裂、不完全分裂(s)、无输精管(a)。建立了一个多变量模型来预测PVSA的合规性:结果:在 388 名患者中,191 人(49.2%)接受了 PVSA。有 4 名患者进行了输精管结扎术复查。其中 3 次是由于组织学检查结果,还有一次是由于精液分析结果显示组织学正常。两侧输精管完全分离的患者和一侧输精管不完全分离的患者在无精子样本数量(95.4% vs 91.2%,ns)、出现罕见非运动性精子(RNMS)的样本数量(2.6% vs 8.8%,ns)和出现精子的样本数量(2.0 vs 0%,ns)方面没有明显差异。符合 PVSA 和不符合 PVSA 的患者在特征上没有差异:本文表明,当 PVSA 达标情况不佳时,对静脉血管进行组织学评估具有一定的作用。组织学上不完全分裂的葡萄膜与不良的 PVSA 并无关联。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Vasectomy histology: Is it still useful?

Objectives: To determine if histological evaluation of the vasa is useful when post-vasectomy semen analysis (PVSA) compliance is low and to determine whether compliance could be predicted.

Methods: A retrospective evaluation of patients undergoing vasectomy between 2018 and 2022 was undertaken. A comparison of the PVSA between three vasa histological categorisations was made: complete divisions, incomplete division(s), absent vas(a). A multivariate model was constructed to predict PVSA compliance.

Results: From 388 patients, 191 (49.2%) undertook PVSA. Four patients had a revision of vasectomy. On 3 occasions this was due to the histology findings and once from semen analysis with normal histology. There was no significant difference in the number of azoospermic samples (95.4% vs 91.2%, ns), of samples with presence of Rare Non-Motile Sperm (RNMS) (2.6% vs 8.8%, ns) and those with sperm present (2.0 vs 0%, ns), between patients with complete division of the vasa on both sides and those with incomplete division on one side respectively. There was no difference in patient characteristics between those who complied with PVSA and those who did not.

Conclusions: This paper suggests that there is a role for histological evaluation of the vasa when PVSA compliance is poor. Incompletely divided vasa on histology are not associated with an adverse PVSA.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
35.70%
发文量
72
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊最新文献
"Bottoms-up" minimally-invasive approach to inguinal lymph node dissection for penile cancer management. A single-center comparative study versus open approach and review. A systematic review and meta-analysis of short- and long-term complications of early versus delayed penile prosthesis implantation in patients with ischemic priapism. Adverse events related to laser fibers and laser machines during ureteroscopy and stone lithotripsy: Insights from an updated 10-year analysis of the US MAUDE database. Can serum 17-hydroxy progesterone predict an improvement in semen parameters following micro-varicocelectomy? A prospective study. CFTR Exon 10 deleterious mutations in patients with congenital bilateral absence of vas deferens in a cohort of Pakistani patients.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1