JABFM
HOME HELP CONTACT US SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Rapid Responses: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Rapid Responses are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Christensen, R. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Christensen, R. E.
The Journal of the American Board of Family Practice 18:327a-328 (2005)
© 2005 American Board of Family Practice


Letter to the Editor

Author’s Reply

Ronald E. Christensen, MD

Independence Park Medical Associates
Anchorage, AK

To the Editor: Dr Ramakrishnan has raised some very good points. There is no absolute protocol for the number or timing of postvasectomy semen analyses. He suggests that a single 3-month postvasectomy semen analysis would probably suffice, which seems reasonable. My research, however, indicates that less than half the men returned at 3 months (25%) than returned for the 6-week check (58%). Because a semen analysis is the only way to know that one has achieved azoospermia—and that is the purpose of the vasectomy—then this noninvasive sampling is logical.

Our study followed Denniston and Pfenninger,1 which suggested customary postoperative care, with the exception that we also encouraged a 12-month postoperative semen check, in which only 8% of men participated. I also agree that because 42% of my patients did not return for ANY postvasectomy semen analysis, there are a significant number of risk-takers getting a vasectomy. It has been our practice not to routinely send specimens of excised vas deferens to pathology, because it just incurs more cost and does not determine the success of the vasectomy.

References

  1. Denniston GC, Pfenninger JL. Vasectomy. In: Proceedures for primary care physicians (Pfenninger JL, Fowler GC, editors). St. Louis: Mosby; 1994. p. 520–40.





This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Rapid Responses: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Rapid Responses are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Christensen, R. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Christensen, R. E.


HOME HELP CONTACT US SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS