Risk of post-vasectomy infections in 133,044 vasectomies from four international vasectomy practices
- PMID: 37267614
- PMCID: PMC10482444
- DOI: 10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2023.0143
Risk of post-vasectomy infections in 133,044 vasectomies from four international vasectomy practices
Abstract
Objectives: To estimate the risk of post-vasectomy infections in various settings and across various surgical techniques and sanitization practices.
Patients and methods: Retrospective review of the records of 133,044 vasectomized patients from four large practices/network of practices using the no-scalpel vasectomy (NSV) technique in Canada (2011-2021), Colombia (2015-2020), New Zealand (2018-2021), and the United Kingdom (2006-2019). We defined infection as any mention in medical records of any antibiotics prescribed for a genital or urinary condition following vasectomy.
Results: Post-vasectomy infection risks were 0.8% (219 infections/26,809 procedures), 2.1% (390/18,490), 1.0% (100/10,506), and 1.3% (1,007/77,239) in Canada, Colombia, New Zealand, and the UK, respectively. Audit period comparison suggests a limited effect on the risk of infection of excising a short vas segment, applying topical antibiotic on scrotal opening, wearing a surgical mask in Canada, type of skin disinfectant, and use of non-sterile gloves in New Zealand. Risk of infection was lower in Colombia when mucosal cautery and fascial interposition [FI] were used for vas occlusion compared to ligation, excision, and FI (0.9% vs. 2.1%, p<0.00001). Low level of infection certainty in 56% to 60% of patients who received antibiotics indicates that the true risk might be overestimated. Lack of information in medical records and patients not consulting their vasectomy providers might have led to underestimation of the risk.
Conclusion: Risk of infection after vasectomy is low, about 1%, among international high-volume vasectomy practices performing NSV and various occlusion techniques. Apart from vasectomy occlusion technique, no other factor modified the risk of post-vasectomy infection.
Keywords: Medical Audit; Infections; Vasectomy.
Copyright® by the International Brazilian Journal of Urology.
Conflict of interest statement
None declared.
Figures
References
-
- Li SQ, Goldstein M, Zhu J, Huber D. The no-scalpel vasectomy. J Urol. 1991;145:341–344. - PubMed
-
- [No Authors]. World Health Organization -WHO, Department of Reproductive Health and Research (WHO/RHR) and Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health/Center for Communication Programs (CCP): Knowledge for Health Project . Family Planning: A Global Handbook for Providers (2018 update) Baltimore and Geneva: CCP and WHO; 2018. [Internet] Available at. < https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/260156/9780999203705-en....
-
- Sharlip ID, Belker AM, Honig S, Labrecque M, Marmar JL, Ross LS, et al. American Urological Association. Vasectomy: AUA guideline. J Urol. 2012;188(6 Suppl):2482–2491. - PubMed
-
- Chen KC, Peng CC, Hsieh HM, Chiang HS. Simply modified no-scalpel vasectomy (percutaneous vasectomy)--a comparative study against the standard no-scalpel vasectomy. Contraception. 2005;71:153–156. - PubMed
-
- Black T, Francome C. Comparison of Marie Stopes scalpel and electrocautery no-scalpel vasectomy techniques. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care. 2003;29:32–34. Erratum in: J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care. 2003;29:159. - PubMed
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical