Journal of Isfahan Medical School

Journal of Isfahan Medical School

Complications, Failure Rate, and Satisfaction of No-scalpel Vasectomy in Isfahan Health Centers

Document Type : Original Article(s)

Authors
Leila Manzouri 1
Pejman Aghdak 2
Shahrbanoo Nematollahi 3
Ashraf Mansouri 3
Aghdas Agha Babaiian 3
Sedigheh Dehghan Nasiri 3
1 Specialist in Community Medicine, Department of Community, Family and School Health, Isfahan Province Health Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.
2 General Practitioner, Department of Community, Family and School Health, Isfahan Province Health Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.
3 Department of Community, Family and School Health, Isfahan Province Health Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.
Abstract
Background: Nowadays, rapid increasing in the world population is the most essential impediment of socioeconomic development in the country that shows the importance of attention to reproductive controlling and family planning. Vasectomy is a simple and effective method of contraception. No-scalpel vasectomy has been done since 2001 in Isfahan province. Due to lack of information about vasectomy, this study was conducted to assess the complication, satisfaction and failure rate of vasectomy. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study. The samples were 188 men that had been done vasectomy in Ebnesina, mollahadi sabzevari, Navvab safavi and khaneh Isfahan health centers of Isfahan city in 2005. Vasectomy was done according to standard protocol by trainer doctor. In each center, samples (47 men) were selected by systematic random sampling. The questionnaires were completed by face to face or telephone interview and available data of completed forms at the time of vasectomy. Demographic characteristics and developed complication after vasectomy were asked. The questions of questionnaire were designed according to reported complication in the literature review. Data were analyzed by SPSS 15 software and descriptive statistics. Finding: The mean age of men was 37.82 ± 5.54 years. The most common reported complication was pain (6.9%). Other reported complications were: sexual dysfunction (2.1%), urinary problem (2.1%), allergic reaction to local anesthesia (1.6%), testis infection (0.5%) and renal stone (0.5%). Sleep disturbance and being repentant were reported in 2.1% and 0.5%, respectively. Vasectomy failure rate was zero and satisfaction rate was 94.7%. Conclusion: With attention to this point that reported complication was low and vasectomy failure rate was zero, it seems that technique of vasectomy has good quality. On the other hand, for decreasing the dissatisfaction rate due to occurring unwanted pregnancy and being repentant due to tendency to have child after vasectomy, good counseling before doing vasectomy is necessary.
Keywords
Vasectomy
Complication
Satisfaction
Failure
Isfahan
  1. Eshraghi N, S, eghipour H, Mostophi N. Vasec-tomy in Noure Saadat reproductive health cen-ter. Hakim 2007; 10(4): 60-5.
  2. Cook LA, Van VH, Lopez LM, Pun A, Gallo MF. Vasectomy occlusion techniques for male sterili-zation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007; (2): CD003991.
  3. Goldstein M. No-scalpel vasectomy: A kinder, gentler approach. Patient Care 1994; 28(20): 55-7.
  4. Schwingl PJ, Guess HA. Safety and effectiveness of vasectomy. Fertil Steril 2000; 73(5): 923-36.
  5. Jamieson DJ, Costello C, Trussell J, Hillis SD, Marchbanks PA, Peterson HB. The risk of preg-nancy after vasectomy. Obstet Gynecol 2004; 103(5 Pt 1): 848-50.
  6. Sokal D, McMullen S, Gates D, Dominik R. A comparative study of the no scalpel and stand-ard incision approaches to vasectomy in 5 coun-tries. The Male Sterilization Investigator Team. J Urol 1999; 162(5): 1621-5.
  7. Awsare NS, Krishnan J, Boustead GB, Hanbury DC, McNicholas TA. Complications of vasec-tomy. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2005; 87(6): 406-10.
  8. Theodor JO, Christopher JC. Ove view of vasec-tomy. 2009; Available from URL:
  9. http://www.uptodate.com/contents/overview-of-vasectomy
  10. Pollack A. ACOG practice bulletin. Clinical management guidelines for obstetrician-gynecologists. Number 46, September 2003. (Replaces technical bulletin number 222, April 1996). Obstet Gynecol 2003; 102(3): 647-58.
  11. 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.
  12. Zoler Ml. urinary stones linked to prior vasecto-my, Medical world News 1988; 29(8):25-43.
  13. Kumar V, Kaza RM, Singh I, Singhal S, Kuma-ran V. An evaluation of the no-scalpel vasecto-my technique. BJU Int 1999; 83(3): 283-4.
  14. Habibi A, Borhani B, Sardarkhani M. The study of satisfaction and complication of vasectomy in Birjand and Nehbandan district from 1901 to 1907. Iranian Jounal of Urology 2008; 21: 49-52. [Persian].
  15. Katsoulis IE, Walker SR. Vasectomy manage-ment in Morecambe Bay NHS Trust. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2005; 87(2): 131-5.
  16. Dunmoye OO, Moodley J, Popis M. Vasectomy in developing countries. J Obstet Gynaecol 2001; 21(3): 295-7.
  17. Choe JM, Kirkemo AK. Questionnaire-based outcomes study of nononcological post-vasectomy complications. J Urol 1996; 155(4): 1284-6.
  18. Fervenza FC, Contreras GE, Garratt KN, Steck-elberg JM. Staphylococcus lugdunensis endocar-ditis: a complication of vasectomy? Mayo Clin Proc 1999; 74(12): 1227-30.
  19. Rajan RR, Cuesta KH, Squadrito J, Jr. Vasove-nous fistula after vasectomy. J Urol 1997; 158(6): 2243.
  20. Teachey DT. Saddle pulmonary embolism as a complication of vasectomy. Urology 2008; 71(2): 351-6.
  21. Guan M, Dagnone AJ, Norman RW. Vaso-cutaneous fistula after vasectomy. Can J Urol 2003; 10(1): 1772-3.
  22. de Diego RE, Correas Gomez MA, Martin GB, Hernandez RR, Portillo Martin JA, Gutierrez Banos JL, et al. [Fournier's gangrene after vasec-tomy]. Arch Esp Urol 2000; 53(3): 275-8.
  23. Population and family health office of ministry of health and medical education, population and health aspect in Islamic Republic of Iran, 2000. [Persian].
  24. Population and family health office of ministry of health and medical education, Integrated Management and Evaluation Survey of repro-ductive health program, 2005. [Persian].
  25. Jafari N, Kavianpour S, Khoshbin S, Arshinchi M. Guide line of contraceptives methods in Is-lamic Republic of Iran, 1st ed. Tehran: ministry of health and medical education; 2005. p. 70. [Persian].
Journal of Isfahan Medical School
Volume 29, Issue 135 - Serial Number 135
March and April 2011
Pages 409-417

  • Receive Date 22 June 2011
  • Accept Date 06 April 2022