Vasectomy with transurethral resection of prostate

Whitlock, Norris W.; McAninch, Jack W.; Stutzman, Ray E.

doi:10.1016/0090-4295(79)90281-4

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Discussion1

Citation Types

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Year Published

1984

1990

Publication Types

Select...

Article2

Relationship

Self Cite0

Independent2

Authors

Journals

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There has been a wide range in the incidence of EO reported; from 0.92 to 2.66% among vasectomized patients compared to 9.06 up to 25% among the nonvasectomized [1][2][3][4]. Whitlock et al [5], however, presented absolutely different conclusions, stat ing that there was no need to perform vasectomy and demonstrating a higher incidence of acute EO among nonvasectomized than among vasectomized patients af ter TURP.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

Vasectomy to Prevent Acute Epididymo-Orchitis after Prostatic Adenomectomy: Still a Controversy

Richter¹,

Embon²,

Saghi³

et al. 1984

Urol Int

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There has been a controversy for almost 80 years about the usefulness of vasectomy in the prevention of acute epididymo-orchitis (EO) after prostatic adenomectomy (PA). In the last few years, improved surgical equipment and new more effective antibiotics have drastically diminished the incidence of this complication. The purpose of this report is to show that because of the devastating effect of the disease, and in spite of its low incidence there is still a clear indication for vasectomy, and also that infected urine, a preoperative indwelling urethral catheter, duration of postoperative catheterization and postoperative complications do not affect the incidence of post-PA acute EO.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%