Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Andrologia clinica pp 114–124Cite as

Problema: contraccezione maschile

  • Chapter

  • 567 Accesses

Riassunto

Nonostante i progressi di altri metodi di controllo delle nascite nel corso di questi ultimi decenni, la vasectomia rimane una delle più diffuse forme di contraccezione. La sicurezza, la semplicità e l’effetto duraturo di questa tecnica ne fanno un’opzione interessante sia per i pazienti che per i medici. Tuttavia, ci sono numerose controversie riguardanti la gestione adeguata di un paziente dopo la vasectomia. In questa rassegna esaminiamo i risultati dopo la vasectomia, focalizzando l’attenzione sullo svolgimento, sugli aspetti tecnici e sull’interpretazione dell’analisi del liquido seminale dopo vasectomia.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliografia

  • Ahmed I, Rasheed S, White C, Shaikh NA (1997) The incidence of postvasectomy chronic testicular pain and the role of nerve stripping (denervazione) of the spermatic cord in its management. Br J Urol 79:269–270

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Alcaraz A, Arango O (1996) Cancer and other risks of vasectomy. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 1:311–318

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Alderman PM (1988) The lurking sperm. A review of failures in 8879 vasectomies performed by one physician. JAMA 259:3142–3144

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Badrakumar C, Gogoi NK, Sundaram SK (2000) Semen analysis after vasectomy: when and how many? Br J Urol 86: 479–481

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Barone MA, Nazerali H, Cortes M, Chen-Mok M, Pollack AE, Sokal D (2003) A prospective study of time and number of ejaculations to azoospermia after vasectomy by ligation and excision. J Urology 170:376–379

    Google Scholar 

  • Benger JR, Swami SK, Gingell JC (1995) Persistent spermatozoa after vasectomy: a survey of British urologists. Br J Urol 76:376–379

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bernal-Delgado E, Latour-Perez J, Pradas-Arnal F, Gomez-Lopez LI (1998) The association between vasectomy and prostate cancer: a systematic review of the literature. Fertil Steril 70:191–200

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chen TF, Ball RY (1991) Epididymectomy for post-vasectomy pain: histological review. Br J Urol 68:407–413

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Clenney TL, Higgins JC (1999) Vasectomy techniques. Am Fam Phys 60: 137–152

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cortes M, Flick A, Barone MA, Amatya R, Pollack AE, OteroFlores J, Juarez C, McMullen S (1997) Results of a pilot study of time to azoospermia after vasectomy in Mexico City. Contraception 56:215–222

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • DeKnijff DWW, Vrijhof HJEJ, Arends J, Janknegt RA (1997) Persistence or reappearance of nonmotile sperm after vasectomy: does it have clinical consequences? Fertil Steril 67:332–335

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards IS (1993) Earlier testing after vasectomy, based on the absence of motile sperm. Fertil Steril 59:431–436

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Esho JO, Cass AS (1978) Recanalization rate following methods of vasectomy using interposition of fascial sheath of vas deferens. J Urology 120:178–179

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Esho JO, Ireland GW, Cass AS (1974) Vasectomy. Comparison of ligation and Fulguration methods. Urology 3:337–338

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Finger WR (1997) Time to azoospermia may be longer than often assumed. Network 18:15

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Freund MJ, Weidmann JE, Goldstein M, Marmar J, Santulli R, Oliveira N (1989) Microrecanalization after vasectomy in man. J Androl 10:120–132

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Giovannucci E, Tosteson TD, Speizer FE, Vessy MP, Colditz GA (1992) A long-term study of mortality in men who have undergone vasectomy. N Engl J Med 326:1392–1398

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Haldar N, Cranston D, Turner E, MacKenzie I, Guillebaud J (2000) How reliable is vasectomy? Long-term follow-up of vasectomized men. Lancet 356:43–44

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hancock P, McLaughlin E for the British Andrology Society (2002) British Andrology Society guidelines for the assessment of post vasectomy semen samples (2002). J Clin Pathol 55:812–816

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Haws JM, Morgan GT, Pollack AE, Koonin LM, Magnani RJ, Gargiullo PM (1998) Clinical aspects of vasectomies performed in the United States in 1995. Urology 52:685–691

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jaffe TM, Kim ED, Hoekstra TH, Lipshultz LI (1998) Sperm pellet analysis: a technique to detect the presence of sperm in men considered to have azoospermia by routine semen analysis. J Urology 159:1548–1550

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Labrecque M, Hoang D, Turcot L (2003) Association between length of the vas deferens excised during vasectomy and the risk of postvasectomy recanalization. Fertil Steril 79:1003–1007

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lemack GE, Goldstein M (1996) Presence of sperm in the prevasectomy reversal semen analysis: incidence and implications. J Urology 155:167–169

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lesko SM, Louik C, Vezina R, Rosenberg L, Shapiro S (1999) Vasectomy and prostate cancer. J Urol 161:1848–1852

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Li SQ, Goldstein M, Zhu J, Huber D (1991) The no-scalpel vasectomy. J Urology 145:341–344

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Liskin I, Renoir E, Blackburn R (1992) Vasectomy — new opportunities. Population Reports [D] 5:1–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu X, Li S (1993) Vasal sterilization in China. Contraception 48:255–266

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mason RG, Dodds L, Swami SK (2002) Sterile water irrigation of the distal vas deferens at vasectomy: does it accelerate clearance of sperm? A prospective randomized trial. Urology 59:424–427

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mettlin C, Natarajan M, Huben R (1990) Vasectomy and prostate cancer risk. Am J Epidemiol 132:1956–1961

    Google Scholar 

  • Myers SA, Mershon CE, Fuchs EF (1997) Vasectomy reversal for treatment of the post-vasectomy pain syndrome. J Urol 157:518–520

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nangia AK, Mules JL, Thomas AJ (2000) Vasectomy reversal for the post-vasectomy pain syndrome: a clinical and histological evaluation. J Urol 164:1939–1342

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nazerali H, Thapa S, Hays M, Pathak LR, Pandey KR, Sokal DC (2003) Vasectomy effectiveness in Nepal: a retrospective study. Contraception 67:397–401

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • O’Brien TS, Cranston D, Ashwin P, Turner E, MacKenzie IZ, Gillebaud J (1995) Temporary reappearance of sperm 12 months after vasectomy. Br J Urol 76:371–372

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Peterson HB, Xia Z, Hughes JM, Wilcox LS, Taylor LR, Trussel J for The US Collaborative Review of Sterilization Working Group (1996) The risk of pregnancy after tubal sterilization: findings from the US collaborative review of sterilization. Am J Obstet Gynecol 174:1161–1170

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Piccinino LJ, Mosher WD (1998) Trends in contraceptive use in the United States: 1982–1995. Fam Plann Perspect 30: 4–10, 46

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg L, Palmer JR, Zauber AG, Warshauer ME, Strom BL, Harlap S, Shapiro A (1994) The relation of vasectomy to the risk of cancer. Am J Epidemiol 140:431–438

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schlegel PN, Goldstein M (1993) Vasectomy. In: Schoupe D, Haseltine FP (eds) Contraception. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 181–191

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwingl PJ, Guess HA (2000) Safety and effectiveness of vasectomy. Fertil Steril 73:923–936

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Smith AG, Crooks J, Singh NP, Scott R, Lloyd SN (1998) Is the timing of post-vasectomy seminal analysis important? Br J Urol 81:458–460

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Smith JC, Cranston D, O’Brien T, Guillebaud J, Hindmarsh J, Turner AG (1994) Fatherhood without apparent spermatozoa after vasectomy. Lancet 344:30

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Stone N, Blum DS, DeAntoni EP, Crawford ED, Schmid K, Eisenberger MA, Berger ER, Jefferson P, Staggers F, Gambert SR (1994) Prostate cancer risk factor analysis among >50,000 men in a national study of prostate-specific antigen (PSA). J Urol 151:278A

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiske WH (2002) Vasectomy. Andrologia 33:125–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

Bibliografia

  • Belker AM (1980) Microsurgical two-layer vasovasostomy: simplified technique using hinged, folding-approximating clamp. Urology 16:376–381

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Belker AM, Thomas AJ Jr, Fuchs EF, Konnak JW, Sharlip ID, Thomas AJ Jr (1991) Results of 1,469 microsurgical vasectomy reversals by the Vasovasostomy Study Group. J Urol 145: 505–511

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kim ED, Winkel E, Orejuela F, Lipshultz LI (1998) Pathological epididymal obstruction unrelated to vasectomy: results with microsurgical reconstruction. J Urol 160:2078–2080

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kolettis PN, Thomas AJ Jr (1997) Vasoepididymostomy for vasectomy reversal: a critical assessment in the era of intracytoplasmic sperm injection. J Urol 158:467–470

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Matthews GJ, Schlegel PN, Goldstein M (1995) Patency following microsurgical vasoepididymostomy and vasovasostomy: temporal considerations. J Urol 154:2070–2073

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt SS (1978) Vasovasostomy. Urol Clin North Am 5:585–592

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Silber SJ (1977) Sperm granuloma and reversibility of vasectomy. Lancet 2:588–589

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Silber SJ (1979) Epididymal extravasation following vasectomy as a cause for failure of vasectomy reversal. Fertil Steril 31:309–315

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Bibliografia

  • Anderson RA, Baird DT (2002) Male contraception. Endocr Rev 23:735–762

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bebb RA, Anawalt BD, Christensen RB, Paulsen CA, Bremner WJ, Matsumoto AM (1996) Combined administration of levonorgestrel and testosterone induces more rapid and effective suppression of spermatogenesis than testosterone alone: a promising male contraceptive approach. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 81:757–762

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper TG (2002) The epididymis as a target for male contraception. In: Robaire B, Hinton BT (eds) The epididymis: from molecules to clinical practice. Kluwer Academic/Plenum, New York, pp 483–502

    Google Scholar 

  • Ford WCL, Waites GMH (1986) Sperm maturation and the potential for contraceptive interference. In: Zatuchni GI, Goldsmith A, Spieler JM, Sciarra JJ (eds) Male contraception: advances and future prospects. Harper and Row, Philadelphia, Pa., pp 89–106

    Google Scholar 

  • Gu YQ, Wang XH, Xu D, Peng L, Cheng LF, Huang MK, Huang ZJ, Zhang GY (2002) A multicenter contraceptive efficacy study of injectable testosterone undecanoate in healthy Chinese men. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 88:562–568

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Handelsman DJ (2003) Hormonal male contraception-lessons from the East when the Western market fails. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 88:559–561

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Handelsman DJ (2005) Male contraception. In: DeGroot LJ, Jameson JL (eds) Endocrinology, 5th edn. WB Saunders, Philadelphia pp 3247–3256

    Google Scholar 

  • Handelsman DJ, Conway AJ, Howe CJ, Turner L, Mackey MA (1996) Establishing the minimum effective dose and additive effects of depot progestin in suppression of human spermatogenesis by a testosterone depot. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 81:4113–4121

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kamischke A, Nieschlag E (2004) Progress towards hormonal male contraception. Trends Pharmacol Sci 25:49–57

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Martin CW, Anderson RA, Cheng L, Ho PC, van der Spuy Z, Smith KB et al (2000) Potential impact of hormonal male contraception: crosscultural implications for development of novel preparations. Hum Reprod 15:637–645

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Meriggiola MC, Bremner WJ, Paulsen CA, Valdiserri A, Incorvaia L, Motta R, Pavani A, Capelli M, Flamigni C (1996) A combined regimen of cyproterone acetate and testosterone enanthate as a potentially highly effective male contraceptive. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 81:3018–3023

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • United Nations (2000) Levels and trends of contraceptive use as assessed in 1998. Department of International Economic and Social Affairs, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Waites GMH (2003) Development of methods of male contraception: impact of the World Health Organization Task Force. Fertil Steril 80:1–15

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • WHO Task Force on Methods for the Regulation of Male Fertility (1990) Contraceptive efficacy of testosterone-induced azoospermia in normal men. Lancet 336: 955–959

    Article  Google Scholar 

Bibliografia

  • Carey RF, Lytle CD, Cyr WH (1999) Implications of laboratory tests of condom integrity. Sex Transm Dis 26:216–220

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gallo MF, Grimes DA, Schulz KF (2003) Nonlatex vs. latex male condoms for contraception: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Contraception 68:319–326

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hatcher RA, Trussell J, Stewart F, Stewart GK, Kowal D, Guest F, Cates W Jr, Policar MS (1994) Contraceptive technology, 16th edn. Irvington, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Holmes KK, Levine R, Weaver M (2004) Effectiveness of condoms in preventing sexually transmitted infections. Bull World Health Organ 82:454–461

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Liskin L, Wharton C, Blackburn R, Kestelman P (1990) Condoms-Now more than ever. Population Information Program, Center for Communication Programs, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore

    Google Scholar 

  • Md.Rogow D, Horowitz S (1995) Withdrawal: a review of the literature and an agenda for research. Stud Fam Plann 26:140–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg MJ, Waugh MS, Solomon HM, Lyszkowski AD (1996) The male polyurethane condom: a review of current knowledge. Contraception 53:141–146

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Trussell J, Grummer-Strawn L (1990) Contraceptive failure of the ovulation method of periodic abstinence. Fam Plann Perspect 22:65–75

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Trussell J, Kost K (1987) Contraceptive failure in the Unites States: a critical review of the literature. Stud Fam Plann 18:237–283

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Trussell J, Vaughan B (1999) Contraceptive failure, method-related discontinuation and resumption of use: results from the 1995 National Survey of Family Growth. Fam Plann Perspect 31:64–72, 93

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Trussell J, Hatcher RA, Cates W, Stewart FH, Kost K (1990) Contraceptive failure in the United States: an update. Stud Fam Plann 21:51–54

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • United Nations (2000) Levels and trends of contraceptive use as assessed in 1998. Department of International Economic and Social Affairs, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsh TL, Frezieres RG, Peacock K, Nelson AL, Clark VA, Bernstein L, Wraxall BG (2003) Use of prostate specific antigen (PSA) to measure semen exposure resulting from male condom failures: implications for contraceptive efficacy and the prevention of sexually transmitted disease. Contraception 67:139–150

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • WHO (1999) Annual Technical Report 1998, Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction, Geneva, Switzerland, p 111

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Squier Urological Clinic, Columbia University Medical Center, 161 Fort Washington Avenue, New York, NY, 10032, USA

    Jay B. Shah

  2. Clinical Urology Department of Urology, Columbia University, Columbia University Medical Center of New York, Presbyterian Hospital, 944 Park Avenue, New York, NY, USA

    Harry Fisch

  3. Department of Urology, University of Louisville School of Medicine, Louisville, Kentucky, 40292, USA

    Arnold M. Belker

  4. 250 E. Liberty St., Suite 602, Louisville, KY, 40202, USA

    Arnold M. Belker

  5. ANZAC, Research Institute & Department of Andrology, Concord Hospital, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, 2139, Australia

    David J. Handelsman & Geoffrey Malcolm Hasting Waites

Authors
  1. Jay B. Shah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Harry Fisch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Arnold M. Belker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. David J. Handelsman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Geoffrey Malcolm Hasting Waites
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Center of Dermatology and Andrology, Justus Liebig University, Giessen, Germany

    Wolf-Bernhard Schill

  2. Center for Medical and Urological Andrology and Reproductive Endocrinology, University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium

    Frank Comhaire

  3. Department of Oncology, University of Edinburgh Human Genetics Building, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK

    Timothy B. Hargreave

  4. Dipartimento di Fisiopatologia Medica, “Sapienza” Università di Roma, Roma, Italy

    Andrea Lenzi MD (Professore Ordinario di Endocrinologia Direttore, Presidente della Società Italiana di Andrologia e Medicina della Sessualità) (Professore Ordinario di Endocrinologia Direttore, Presidente della Società Italiana di Andrologia e Medicina della Sessualità)

  5. Unità di Fisiopatologia della Riproduzione, Andrologia e Diagnosi Endocrinologiche Dipartimento di Fisiopatologia Medica, “Sapienza” Università di Roma, Roma, Italy

    Andrea M. Isidori MD, PhD (Ricercatore in Endocrinologia) (Ricercatore in Endocrinologia)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer-Verlag Italia

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Shah, J.B., Fisch, H., Belker, A.M., Handelsman, D.J., Waites, G.M.H. (2010). Problema: contraccezione maschile. In: Schill, WB., Comhaire, F., Hargreave, T.B., Lenzi, A., Isidori, A.M. (eds) Andrologia clinica. Springer, Milano. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-1487-9_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-1487-9_11

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Milano

  • Print ISBN: 978-88-470-1486-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-88-470-1487-9

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation