Abstract
Male infertility procedures are commonly performed under general and monitored anesthesia. Despite many advantages such as convenience, reduced costs, faster recovery, and avoiding risks of general/monitored anesthesia, limited information is available to providers on key logistics and techniques relating to office-based male infertility procedures. Therefore, this chapter is intended to provide a detailed description of these procedures with a specific focus on clinical setup, administration of local anesthesia, and tips and tricks on overcoming the learning curve.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Neri QV, Tanaka N, Wang A, et al. Intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Accomplishments and qualms. Minerva Ginecol. 2004;56:189.
Esteves SC, Sanchez-Martin F, Sanchez-Martin P, et al. Comparison of reproductive outcome in oligozoospermic men with high sperm DNA fragmentation undergoing intracytoplasmic sperm injection with ejaculated and testicular sperm. Fertil Steril. 2015;104:1398.
Sakkas D, Manicardi G, Bianchi PG, et al. Relationship between the presence of endogenous nicks and sperm chromatin packaging in maturing and fertilizing mouse spermatozoa. Biol Reprod. 1995;52:1149.
Spano M, Bonde JP, Hjollund HI, et al. Sperm chromatin damage impairs human fertility. The Danish First Pregnancy Planner Study Team. Fertil Steril. 2000;73:43.
Zini A, Sigman M. Are tests of sperm DNA damage clinically useful? Pros and cons. J Androl. 2009;30:219.
Bungum M, Humaidan P, Axmon A, et al. Sperm DNA integrity assessment in prediction of assisted reproduction technology outcome. Hum Reprod. 2007;22:174.
Wang YJ, Zhang RQ, Lin YJ, et al. Relationship between varicocele and sperm DNA damage and the effect of varicocele repair: a meta-analysis. Reprod Biomed Online. 2012;25:307.
Greco E, Scarselli F, Iacobelli M, et al. Efficient treatment of infertility due to sperm DNA damage by ICSI with testicular spermatozoa. Hum Reprod. 2005;20:226.
Bradley CK, McArthur SJ, Gee AJ, et al. Intervention improves assisted conception intracytoplasmic sperm injection outcomes for patients with high levels of sperm DNA fragmentation: a retrospective analysis. Andrology. 2016;4:903.
Nudell DM, Conaghan J, Pedersen RA, et al. The mini-micro-epididymal sperm aspiration for sperm retrieval: a study of urological outcomes. Hum Reprod. 1998;13:1260.
Ezeh UI, Shepherd S, Moore HD, et al. Morbidity and cost-effectiveness analysis of outpatient analgesia versus general anaesthesia for testicular sperm extraction in men with azoospermia due to defects in spermatogenesis. Hum Reprod. 1999;14:321.
Kaye KW, Gonzalez R, Fraley EE. Microsurgical vasovasostomy: an outpatient procedure under local anesthesia. J Urol. 1983;129:992.
Kaye KW, Clayman RV, Lange PH. Outpatient hydrocele and spermatocele repair under local anesthesia. J Urol. 1983;130:269.
Ghanem H, Fouad G. Penile prosthesis surgery under local penile block anaesthesia via the infrapubic space. Int J Androl. 2000;23:357.
Hsu GL, Ling PY, Hsieh CH, et al. Outpatient varicocelectomy performed under local anesthesia. Asian J Androl. 2005;7:439.
Kadihasanoglu M, Karaguzel E, Kacar CK, et al. Local or spinal anesthesia in subinguinal varicocelectomy: a prospective randomized trial. Urology. 2012;80:9.
Magoha GA. Local infiltration and spermatic cord block for inguinal, scrotal and testicular surgery. East Afr Med J. 1998;75:579.
Leach GE. Local anesthesia for urologic procedures. Urology. 1996;48:284.
Kumar R, Gupta NP. Subinguinal microsurgical varicocelectomy: evaluation of the results. Urol Int. 2003;71:368.
Hirsch IH, Abdel-Meguid TA, Gomella LG. Postsurgical outcomes assessment following varicocele ligation: laparoscopic versus subinguinal approach. Urology. 1998;51:810.
Amelar RD. Early and late complications of inguinal varicocelectomy. J Urol. 2003;170:366.
Marmar JL, Kim Y. Subinguinal microsurgical varicocelectomy: a technical critique and statistical analysis of semen and pregnancy data. J Urol. 1994;152:1127.
Al-Kandari AM, Khudair A, Arafa A, et al. Microscopic subinguinal varicocelectomy in 100 consecutive cases: spermatic cord vascular anatomy, recurrence and hydrocele outcome analysis. Arab J Urol. 2018;16:181.
Barbalias GA, Liatsikos EN, Nikiforidis G, et al. Treatment of varicocele for male infertility: a comparative study evaluating currently used approaches. Eur Urol. 1998;34:393.
Gontero P, Pretti G, Fontana F, et al. Inguinal versus subinguinal varicocele vein ligation using magnifying loupe under local anesthesia: which technique is preferable in clinical practice? Urology. 2005;66:1075.
Meng MV, Greene KL, Turek PJ. Surgery or assisted reproduction? A decision analysis of treatment costs in male infertility. J Urol. 2005;174:1926.
Pavlovich CP, Schlegel PN. Fertility options after vasectomy: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Fertil Steril. 1997;67:133.
Kolettis PN, Thomas AJ Jr. Vasoepididymostomy for vasectomy reversal: a critical assessment in the era of intracytoplasmic sperm injection. J Urol. 1997;158:467.
Alom M, Ziegelmann M, Savage J, et al. Office-based andrology and male infertility procedures-a cost-effective alternative. Transl Androl Urol. 2017;6(4):761–72.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Toussi, A., Trost, L.W. (2020). Office-Based Microsurgery Under Local Anesthesia for Male Infertility. In: Parekattil, S., Esteves, S., Agarwal, A. (eds) Male Infertility. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-32300-4_17
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-32300-4_17
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-32299-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-32300-4
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)