Advertisement

Microsurgery for Male Infertility: The AIIMS Experience

  • Rajeev KumarEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

The diseases responsible for male infertility and for cases undergoing exploration for microsurgical reconstruction at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences possibly differ from those reported in most Western literature. The largest number of cases surgically explored is for primary infertility with obstruction of unknown etiology. This has resulted in lower percentage of patients with a successful outcome. However, the socioeconomic factors around infertility management in our country dictate an attempt at reconstruction even when the expected outcomes are poor. Infertility is a major social issue in the Indian culture with immense pressure on married couples to have children. The stigma surrounding infertility is such that couples prefer seeking treatment through discreet unqualified practitioners who offer quick cures rather than visit a public hospital, thus delaying meaningful intervention. Coupled with the low per capita income and lack of adequate health insurance, social issues have a major impact on the management of male infertility at AIIMS. Fortunately, in patients with favorable prognostic factors, the outcomes are generally good.

Keywords

Microsurgery for male infertility Congenital bilateral absence of the vas deferens Genital tuberculosis Filariasis Vaso-epididymal anastomosis Microsurgical varicocelectomy Vasovasal anastomosis Azoospermia 

References

  1. 1.
    Kumar R, Thulkar S, Kumar V, Jagannathan NR, Gupta NP. Contribution of investigations to the diagnosis of congenital vas aplasia. ANZ J Surg. 2005;5:807–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Meng MV, Cha I, Ljung BM, Turek PJ. Testicular fine-needle aspiration in infertile men: correlation of cytologic pattern with biopsy histology. Am J Surg Pathol. 2001;25:71–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kumar R, Gautam G, Gupta NP, Aron M, Dada R, Kucheria K, et al. Role of testicular fine-needle aspiration cytology in infertile men with clinically obstructive azoospermia. Nat Med J Ind. 2006;19:18–9.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kumar R. Surgery for azoospermia in the Indian patient: why is it different? Indian J Urol. 2011;27(1):98–101.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Schiff J, Chan P, Li PS, Finkelberg S, Goldstein M. Outcome and late failures compared in 4 techniques of microsurgical vasoepididymostomy in 153 consecutive men. J Urol. 2005;174:651–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chan PT, Brandell RA, Goldstein M. Prospective analysis of outcomes after microsurgical intussusception vasoepididymostomy. BJU Int. 2005;96:598–601.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Viswaroop B, Johnson P, Kurian S, Chacko N, Kekre N, Gopalakrishnan G. Fine-needle aspiration cytology versus open biopsy for evaluation of chronic epididymal lesions: a prospective study. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 2005;39:219–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Orakwe JC, Okafor PI. Genitourinary tuberculosis in Nigeria; a review of thirty-one cases. Niger J Clin Pract. 2005;8:69–73.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lenk S, Schroeder J. Genitourinary tuberculosis. Curr Opin Urol. 2001;11:93–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kumar R. Reproductive tract tuberculosis and male infertility. Indian J Urol. 2008;24:92–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kumar R, Hemal AK. Bilateral epididymal masses with infertility. ANZ J Surg. 2004;74:391.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ekwere PD. Filarial orchitis: a cause of male infertility in the tropics–case report from Nigeria. Cent Afr J Med. 1989;35:456–60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Eyquem A, Heuze D, Schwartz J, Languillat G. Implications of ­heterophile antigens in immunological infertility in males. Arch Androl. 1978;1:241–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Phadke AM, Samant NR, Dewal SD. Smallpox as an etiologic ­factor in male infertility. Fertil Steril. 1973;24:802–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Berger RE. Triangulation end-to-side vasoepididymostomy. J Urol. 1998;159:1951–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Marmar JL. Modified vasoepididymostomy with simultaneous double needle placement, tubulotomy and tubular invagination. J Urol. 2000;163:483–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kumar R, Gautam G, Gupta NP. Early patency rates following the two-stitch invagination technique of vasoepidiymal anastomosis for idiopathic obstruction. BJU Int. 2006;97:575–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kumar R, Mukherjee S, Gupta NP. Intussusception vasoepididymostomy with longitudinal suture placement for idiopathic obstructive azoospermia. J Urol. 2010;183:1489–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Chan PT, Li PS, Goldstein M. Microsurgical vasoepididymostomy: a prospective randomized study of 3 intussusception techniques in rats. J Urol. 2003;169:1924–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kumar R. Re: microsurgical vasoepididymostomy: a prospective randomized study of 3 intussusception techniques in rats. J Urol. 2004;171:810–1.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gautam G, Kumar R, Gupta NP. Factors predicting the patency of two-stitch invagination vasoepididymal anastomosis for idiopathic obstruction. Indian J Urol. 2005;21:112–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Dhillon BS, Chandhiok N, Kambo I, Saxena NC. Induced abortion and concurrent adoption of contraception in the rural areas of India (an ICMR task force study). Indian J Med Sci. 2004;58:478–84.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Jina RP, Kumar V. Recanalisation of vas. J Indian Med Assoc. 1979;72:30–2.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kumar R, Mukherjee S. “4  ×  4 vasovasostomy”: a simplified technique for vasectomy reversal. Indian J Urol. 2010;26(3):350–2.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Belker AM, Thomas Jr AJ, Fuchs EF, Konnak JW, Sharlip ID. Results of 1,469 microsurgical vasectomy reversals by the Vasovasostomy Study Group. J Urol. 1991;145:505–11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kumar R, Gupta NP. Subinguinal microsurgical varicocelectomy: evaluation of results. Urol Int. 2003;71:361–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sharlip ID, Jarow JP, Belker AM, Lipshultz LI, Sigman M, Thomas AJ, Schlegel PN, Howards SS, Nehra A, Damewood MD, Overstreet JW, Sadovsky R. Best practice policies for male infertility. Fertil Steril. 2002;77:873–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kumar R, Gupta NP. Varicocele and the urologist. Indian J Urol. 2006;22:98–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of UrologyAll India Institute of Medical SciencesNew DelhiIndia

Personalised recommendations