Skip to main content

Robotic Microsurgery for Male Infertility and Chronic Orchialgia

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
  • 1998 Accesses

Abstract

Since the use of the operating microscope for microsurgery in 1975, there has been a steady increase in the use of such technology in the operative management of male infertility and chronic testicular or groin pain. Added to the reports relating to greater patency rates and fertility rates of vasovasostomy performed with the operating microscope, the concepts of magnification have been successfully applied to vasoepididymostomy and varicocele ligation. More recently, microscopic spermatic cord neurolysis has demonstrated applicability to the treatment of groin and testicular discomfort. These techniques require varying degrees of microsurgical skills and an array of supporting technology, neither of which may be part of many urologist’s personal or technical armamentarium. The melding of improved visualization with magnification to an ergonomic platform that can be operated remotely has a significant application to testicular and reproductive surgery. Robotic assistance during surgical procedures has been utilized in a wide array of surgical fields with the above mentioned benefits. This chapter covers the latest developments in the robotic microsurgical platform, robotic microsurgical tools, and current evaluations of various robotic microsurgical applications for male infertility and patients with chronic testicular or groin pain.

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

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   249.99
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

References

  1. Silber SJ. Microsurgery in clinical urology. Urology. 1975;6:150–3.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Marmar JL. Modified vasoepididymostomy with simultaneous double needle placement, tubulotomy and tubular invagination. J Urol. 2000;163:483–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Berger RE. Triangulation end-to-side vasoepididymostomy. J Urol. 1998;159:1951–3.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Chan PT, Li PS, Goldstein M. Microsurgical vasoepididymostomy: a prospective randomized study of 3 intussusception techniques in rats. J Urol. 2003;169:1924–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Fogdestam I, Fall M. Microsurgical end-to-end and end-to-side epididymovasostomy to correct occlusive azoospermia. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg. 1983;17:137–40.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Marmar JL, Kim Y. Subinguinal microsurgical varicocelectomy: a technical critique and statistical analysis of semen and pregnancy data. J Urol. 1994;152:1127–32.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Owen ER. Microsurgical vasovasostomy: a reliable vasectomy reversal. Aust N Z J Surg. 1977;47:305–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Schlegel PN. Testicular sperm extraction: microdissection improves sperm yield with minimal tissue excision. Hum Reprod. 1999;14:131–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Schultheiss D, Denil J. History of the microscope and development of microsurgery: a revolution for reproductive tract surgery. Andrologia. 2002;34:234–41.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Silber SJ. Microscopic vasoepididymostomy: specific microanastomosis to the epididymal tubule. Fertil Steril. 1978;30:565–71.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Thomas Jr AJ. Vasoepididymostomy. Urol Clin North Am. 1987;14:527–38.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Owen ER. Microsurgical vasovasostomy: a reliable vasectomy reversal. J Urol. 1977;47:305–9.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Levine LA. Microsurgical denervation of the spermatic cord. J Sex Med. 2008;5:526–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Oliveira RG, Camara C, Alves Jde M, et al. Microsurgical testicular denervation for the treatment of chronic testicular pain initial results. Clinics (Sao Paulo). 2009;64:393–6.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Bourla DH, Hubschman JP, Culjat M, et al. Feasibility study of intraocular robotic surgery with the da vinci surgical system. Retina. 2008;28:154–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Casale P. Robotic pediatric urology. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2008;5:59–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Colombo Jr JR, Santos B, Hafron J, et al. Robotic assisted radical prostatectomy: surgical techniques and outcomes. Int Braz J Urol. 2007;33:803–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Guru KA, Wilding GE, Piacente P, et al. Robot-assisted radical cystectomy versus open radical cystectomy: assessment of postoperative pain. Can J Urol. 2007;14:3753–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Rodriguez E, Chitwood Jr WR. Minimally invasive, robotic cardiac surgery. Ann Thorac Surg. 2008;85:357–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Cocuzza M, Pagani R, Coelho R, et al. The systematic use of intraoperative vascular doppler ultrasound during microsurgical subinguinal varicocelectomy improves precise identification and preservation of testicular blood supply. Fertil Steril. 2010;93(7):2396–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Kuang W, Shin PR, Matin S, Thomas Jr AJ. Initial evaluation of robotic technology for microsurgical vasovasostomy. J Urol. 2004;171:300–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Kuang W, Shin PR, Oder M, Thomas Jr AJ. Robotic-assisted vasovasostomy: a two-layer technique in an animal model. Urology. 2005;65:811–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Schiff J, Li PS, Goldstein M. Robotic microsurgical vasovasostomy and vasoepididymostomy: a prospective randomized study in a rat model. J Urol. 2004;171:1720–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Schiff J, Li PS, Goldstein M. Robotic microsurgical vasovasostomy and vasoepididymostomy in rats. Int J Med Robot. 2005;1:122–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Schoor RA, Ross L, Niederberger C. Robotic assisted microsurgical vasal reconstruction in a model system. World J Urol. 2003;21:48–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Fleming C. Robot-assisted vasovasostomy. Urol Clin North Am. 2004;31:769–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Parekattil SJ, Moran ME. Robotic instrumentation: evolution and microsurgical applications. Indian J Urol. 2010;26:395–403.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Parekattil S, Cohen M, Vieweg J. Human robotic assisted bilateral vasoepididymostomy and vasovasostomy procedures: Initial safety and efficacy trial. Proc SPIE. 2009;7161:71611L.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Parekattil S, Atalah H, Cohen M. Video technique for human robotic assisted microsurgical vasovasostomy. J Endourol. 2010;24:511–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Corcione F, Esposito C, Cuccurullo D, et al. Advantages and limits of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery: preliminary experience. Surg Endosc. 2005;19:117–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Chen XF, Zhou LX, Liu YD, et al. comparative analysis of three different surgical approaches to varicocelectomy. Zhonghua Nan Ke Xue. 2009;15:413–6.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Cayan S, Shavakhabov S, Kadioglu A. Treatment of palpable varicocele in infertile men: a meta-analysis to define the best technique. J Androl. 2009;30:33–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Al-Said S, Al-Naimi A, Al-Ansari A, et al. Varicocelectomy for male infertility: a comparative study of open, laparoscopic and microsurgical approaches. J Urol. 2008;180:266–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Al-Kandari AM, Shabaan H, Ibrahim HM, et al. Comparison of outcomes of different varicocelectomy techniques: open inguinal, laparoscopic, and subinguinal microscopic varicocelectomy: a randomized clinical trial. Urology. 2007;69:417–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Shu T, Taghechian S, Wang R. Initial experience with robot-assisted varicocelectomy. Asian J Androl. 2008;10:146–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Dr. Johannes Vieweg, Dr. Li-Ming Su, Dr. Philip Li, Dr. Hany Atalah, Katy Lyall, David Regan, Dr. Rachana Suchdev, Intuitive Surgical and Vascular Technology Inc. for their continued support in the pursuit and refinement of robotic microsurgical techniques and tools.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jamin V. Brahmbhatt MD .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Brahmbhatt, J.V., Parekattil, S.J. (2012). Robotic Microsurgery for Male Infertility and Chronic Orchialgia. In: Parekattil, S., Agarwal, A. (eds) Male Infertility. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3335-4_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3335-4_11

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-3334-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-3335-4

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics