Literature DB >> 26388500

Comparative Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Modified 1-Layer versus Formal 2-Layer Vasovasostomy Technique.

Yaw A Nyame1, Paurush Babbar1, Nima Almassi1, Alan S Polackwich1, Edmund Sabanegh2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Approximately 2% to 6% of men undergoing vasectomy will ultimately have it reversed. Cost is a major consideration for patients and providers with regard to vasovasostomy. Opportunities for cost savings for vasectomy reversal lie in the reduction of variable costs, namely operative time and materials used. In this study we determine the cost benefits of a modified 1-layer vasovasostomy compared to a formal 2-layer vasovasostomy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed of a single surgeon experience of vasectomy reversals performed from 2010 to 2015. The cohort consisted of men who underwent bilateral vasovasostomy using a formal 2-layer or modified 1-layer technique. The primary end points of the analysis were total operative time; number, cost and type of suture used; and patency/postoperative semen analysis. Bivariate analysis was performed for these continuous variables using the Wilcoxon rank test and the chi-square test was used for categorical variables.
RESULTS: Of the 106 men who underwent bilateral vasovasostomy 81.1% (86) had a formal and 18.9% (20) had a modified 1-layer repair. The modified 1-layer closure resulted in a significantly shorter operative time, lower microsuture cost and lower overall operative cost compared to formal repair (all p <0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in semen parameters between the 2 techniques at the first postoperative visit.
CONCLUSIONS: The modified 1-layer vasovasostomy resulted in shorter operative times and lower costs compared to formal repair without compromising postoperative patency. In this era of cost containment the modified repair provides the opportunity to perform vasectomy reversal at a lower cost to patients and providers.
Copyright © 2016 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cost-benefit analysis; operative; surgical procedures; vasovasostomy

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26388500     DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2015.08.102

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  3 in total

1.  Vasectomy reversal utilizing fibrin glue.

Authors:  G Luke Machen; Ali M Mahmoud; Colin E Kleinguetl; Wencong Chen; Stephanie E Harris; Erin T Bird
Journal:  Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent)       Date:  2019-03-20

2.  Loupe-Assisted Vasovasostomy Using a Prolene Stent: A Simpler Vasectomy Reversal Technique.

Authors:  Jong Chul Jeon; Taekmin Kwon; Sejun Park; Sungchan Park; Sang Hyeon Cheon; Kyung Hyun Moon
Journal:  World J Mens Health       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 5.400

Review 3.  Vasovasostomy and vasoepididymostomy: Review of the procedures, outcomes, and predictors of patency and pregnancy over the last decade.

Authors:  Takeshi Namekawa; Takashi Imamoto; Mayuko Kato; Akira Komiya; Tomohiko Ichikawa
Journal:  Reprod Med Biol       Date:  2018-05-22
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.