Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39890927›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of impotence research2025

Comparing vasectomy techniques, recovery and complications: tips and tricks.

Joseph A Borrell, Catherine Gu, Nancy Ye, Jesse N Mills, Juan J Andino

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of impotence research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Joseph A BorrellDavid Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Catherine GuDepartment of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Nancy YeDepartment of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Jesse N MillsDepartment of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7833-7071
Juan J AndinoDepartment of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA. JAndino@mednet.ucla.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0466-6830

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Vasectomies are safe and effective, achieving up to 99.7% in sterilization, with complication rates around 1-2%. As vasectomy uptake rises, physicians should stay informed about counseling, isolation and occlusion techniques, post-op recovery, and associated risks and complications. Historically, pre-vasectomy counseling has been performed in-person, but recent literature has shown that telehealth is a viable alternative, and a physical exam may not be necessitated. With regard to vas isolation and occlusion, current international guidelines support a minimally invasive approach such as no-scalpel vasectomy with mucosal cautery and fascial interposition, as they are the most effective in achieving vasectomy success and have the lowest complication rates. After a vasectomy, patients should undergo a post-vasectomy semen analysis 8-16 weeks after the procedure to ensure severe non-motile oligozoospermia (≤100,000 non-motile sperm/mL) or azoospermia. While risks and complications from vas isolation and occlusion are rare, patients should be informed about the potential for hematomas, infections, postoperative pain, and vas recanalization. In the U.S, vasectomies have increased in utilization from previous years, likely in the setting of increased access to telehealth and restricted female reproductive access. This trend raises questions about future fertility options such as vasectomy reversals and highlights the need for informed decision-making.

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.