Male Infertility Microsurgical Training

Chapter

Abstract

Microsurgical training is important for urologists and clinical ­andrologists specializing in male infertility [1, 2]. Like “pure microvascular,” plastic, and other reconstructive microsurgeries, microsurgery for male infertility ranks among the most technically and mentally challenging of surgical procedures. Most male infertility microsurgeries are performed under 10–25× magnification. Under the operating microscope, tiny movements are magnified by 15–40×. There are few surgical fields where outcomes are so dependent on technical performance in the operating room. Success in male infertility microsurgery is therefore heavily dependent on the quality and extent of practice and training in the microsurgical laboratory [3, 4]. Coordination, dexterity, and steadiness of one’s hands and fingers can be developed with extensive practice in the laboratory. The purpose of this chapter is to review the basic male infertility microsurgical skills for working with microsurgical instruments, needles, and sutures at different magnifications. Male infertility microsurgery should be learned in the laboratory, not on patients.

Keywords

Male Infertility Microsurgery Training Urology 

References

  1. 1.
    Silber SJ. Microsurgery for male infertility. Microsurgery. 1988;9:251.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gilbert BR, Goldstein M. New directions in male reproductive microsurgery. Microsurgery. 1988;9:281.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Li PS, Schlegel PN, Goldstein M. Use of silicone medical grade tubing for microsurgical vasovasostomy training. Urology. 1992;39:556.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Goldstein M. The making of a microsurgeon. J Androl. 2006;27:161.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Acland RD. Instrumentation for microsurgery. Orthop Clin North Am. 1977;8:281.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sheynkin YR, Li PS, Magid ML, et al. Comparison of absorbable and nonabsorbable sutures for microsurgical vasovasostomy in rats. Urology. 1999;53:1235.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sharlip ID. Vasovasostomy: comparison of two microsurgical techniques. Urology. 1981;17:347.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Southwick GJ, Temple-Smith PD. Epididymal microsurgery: current techniques and new horizons. Microsurgery. 1988;9:266.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Belker AM. Technical aids for vasovasostomy. Urology. 1982;20:635.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Goldstein M. Microspike approximator for vasovasostomy. J Urol. 1985;134:74.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Belker AM, Acland RD, Sexter MS, et al. Microsurgical two-layer vasovasostomy: laboratory use of vasectomized segments. Fertil Steril. 1978;29:48.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Monoski MA, Schiff J, Li PS, et al. Innovative single-armed suture technique for microsurgical vasoepididymostomy. Urology. 2007;69:800.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chan PT, Li PS, Goldstein M. Microsurgical vasoepididymostomy: a prospective randomized study of 3 intussusception techniques in rats. J Urol. 2003;169:1924.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Philip S. Li
    • 1
  • Ranjith Ramasamy
    • 1
  • Marc Goldstein
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Urology, Center for Male Reproductive Medicine and Microsurgery, Weill Cornell Medical CollegeCornell UniversityNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations