The Study Of Microsurgical Longitudinal2-stuture Ussusceptive Vasoepididymostomy For The Treatment Of Epididymal Obstructive Azoospermia

Objective: Through compareing the treatment effects of microsurgical longitudinal2-stuture intussusception vasoepididymostomy(MLIVES) and microsurgical end-to-sidevasoepididymostomy for the treatment of epididymal obstructive azoospermia(EOA), Wewant to study the treatment effect of MLIVES. Methods：We analyed52patients withepididymal obstructive azoospermia between January2008and June2011. The25patientswho were underwent MLIVES is group A, the other27patients who were underwentmicrosurgical end–to–side vasoepididymostomy is group B. Then we use the Chi-squarecontingency table analysis of the SPSS17.0to analye the patency rate, their spouse ofspregnancy rate and the sperm granuloma incidence of two groups．Results: The patencyrate of group A was68%(17/25)and group B was37.04%(10/27), the differences betweenthe two groups was significant (χ~2=4.986,P=0.026). Pregnancy rate of their spouse ofgroup A was48%(12/25)and group B was18.52%(5/27), the differences between the twogroups was significant (χ~2=5.127,P=0.024). The sperm granuloma incidence of group Awas16(4/25)and group B was44.44%(12/27), the differences between the two groups wassignificant (χ~2=4.930,P=0.026). Conclusion: Through the study, Compare to the micro-surgical end-to-side vasoepididymostomy, MLIVES is better to treat the patients withEOA. MLIVES is a simpler and more effective treatment for patients with EOA.