RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Due to the COVID-19 pandemic teleconsultation was allowed as an insured service in the province of Quebec, Canada. We assessed the preferences of vasectomized patients for a pre-vasectomy consultation conducted in-person or by telephone. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In September 2021, we sought the participation of 214 men who had their pre-vasectomy consultation over the phone to complete an anonymous three-item survey on their preferred modality for pre-vasectomy consultation. They completed their questionnaire in the waiting room of the vasectomy clinic just after the surgical procedure. We calculated the proportion and 95% confidence interval [CI] of patients preferring each modality. We assessed the difference in preference according to the distance between hometown and vasectomy clinic (< 25 km, 25-50 km, and > 50 km) with Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: Participation rate was 98% (n = 209/214). Most patients would have preferred telephone over in-person pre-vasectomy consultation if they had been given a choice (96%; 95% CI 92% to 98%), if they had had to recommend a modality to a friend (95%; 95% CI 91% to 98%), and if they had had to do a pre-vasectomy consultation again (prefer or no preference; total 97%; 95% CI 94% to 99%). Distance between hometown and vasectomy clinic did not significantly influence their preferences (p > 0.29 for each of the three items). CONCLUSIONS: Vasectomized men preferred having pre-vasectomy consultation by telephone instead of in person. If maintained as an insured service after the COVID-19 pandemic, Canadian physicians offering vasectomy services should consider making this service available to their patients.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Vasectomia , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Canadá , Humanos , Masculino , Pandemias , Encaminhamento e Consulta , Inquéritos e Questionários , TelefoneRESUMO
PURPOSE: To determine the prevalence of unilateral absence of vas deferens (UAVD) in men with both testes seeking vasectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Computerized charts of 23.013 patients encountered between January 1994 and December 2013 in one university hospital and two community clinics of Quebec City, Canada, were searched. Pre-vasectomy consultation, operative reports and semen analysis results were reviewed to identify cases of UAVD. Cases were categorized as confirmed (unilateral vasectomy and success confirmed by semen analysis) or possible congenital UAVD further sub-categorized according to whether or not a scrotal anomaly was present. RESULTS: Among 159 men identified as potentially having UAVD, chart review revealed that 47 had only one testicle, 26 had bilateral vasa, and four were misdiagnosed (post-vasectomy semen analysis [PVSA] showing motile sperm after unilateral vasectomy) leaving 82 men deemed cases of UAVD (0.36%, 95% confidence interval 0.28% to 0.43%). These were classified as confirmed (n=48, 0.21%) and possible (n=34, 0.15%; 22 without and 12 with scrotal anomalies) congenital UAVD. The misdiagnosis ratio of UAVD was low when scrotal content was otherwise normal (1:48), but higher if anomalies were present (3:12). CONCLUSIONS: Most surgeons who perform vasectomy will encounter cases of UAVD. In most suspected cases, it is safe and effective to proceed with unilateral vasectomy under local anesthesia while stressing the need for PVSA. Further studies or scrotal exploration may be considered in patient with prior scrotal surgery.
Assuntos
Anormalidades Urogenitais/epidemiologia , Ducto Deferente/anormalidades , Vasectomia/estatística & dados numéricos , Adulto , Canadá/epidemiologia , Humanos , Masculino , Prontuários Médicos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Prevalência , Estudos Retrospectivos , Análise do Sêmen , Fatores de TempoRESUMO
ABSTRACT Purpose: To determine the prevalence of unilateral absence of vas deferens (UAVD) in men with both testes seeking vasectomy. Materials and Methods: Computerized charts of 23,013 patients encountered between January 1994 and December 2013 in one university hospital and two community clinics of Quebec City, Canada, were searched. Pre-vasectomy consultation, operative reports and semen analysis results were reviewed to identify cases of UAVD. Cases were categorized as confirmed (unilateral vasectomy and success confirmed by semen analysis) or possible congenital UAVD further sub-categorized according to whether or not a scrotal anomaly was present. Results: Among 159 men identified as potentially having UAVD, chart review revealed that 47 had only one testicle, 26 had bilateral vasa, and four were misdiagnosed (post-vasectomy semen analysis [PVSA] showing motile sperm after unilateral vasectomy) leaving 82 men deemed cases of UAVD (0.36%, 95% confidence interval 0.28% to 0.43%). These were classified as confirmed (n=48, 0.21%) and possible (n=34, 0.15%; 22 without and 12 with scrotal anomalies) congenital UAVD. The misdiagnosis ratio of UAVD was low when scrotal content was otherwise normal (1:48), but higher if anomalies were present (3:12). Conclusions: Most surgeons who perform vasectomy will encounter cases of UAVD. In most suspected cases, it is safe and effective to proceed with unilateral vasectomy under local anesthesia while stressing the need for PVSA. Further studies or scrotal exploration may be considered in patient with prior scrotal surgery.