A study to assess the prevalence of chronic testicular pain in post-vasectomy men compared to non-vasectomised men

31Citations
Citations of this article
7Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objective. To assess the prevalence of chronic post-vasectomy testicular pain (CPTP) compared to the prevalence of chronic testicular pain in a control population of non-vasectomised men. Methods. A retrospective postal study of 198 men who had a vasectomy more than 3 years previously at the Palatine Centre to determine the incidence of CPTP, of whom 101 (51%) replied (mean age 40.4 years, range 29-54 years, mean time since vasectomy 46.5 months). A control group of 102 men (mean age 40.2 years, range 28-55 years) who had not had a vasectomy were obtained via patients attending the community family planning clinics or associated general practitioner (GP) services in the same geographical area. Results. Occasional non-troublesome discomfort was reported by 37/101 of the post-vasectomy men compared to 21/102 of the control group. Occasional discomfort which was a nuisance was felt by 10/101 of the post-vasectomy group compared with 3/102 of the control group, and 6/101 in the post-vasectomy group reported pain severe enough to seek medical advice compared to only 2/102 controls. None of the post-vasectomy men regretted having had the operation. Conclusions. Only 6% of cases (compared to 2% of controls) experienced pain severe enough to seek medical advice in the 3-4-year post-operative period. However, there was a significant difference in the prevalence of occasional testicular discomfort between post-vasectomy men and controls. Mostly these pains were not regarded as troublesome, however men attending for vasectomy counselling should be informed of the possibility of this morbidity.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Morris, C., Mishra, K., & Kirkman, R. J. E. (2002). A study to assess the prevalence of chronic testicular pain in post-vasectomy men compared to non-vasectomised men. Journal of Family Planning and Reproductive Health Care, 28(3), 142–144. https://doi.org/10.1783/147118902101196298

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free