Since 1975, introducing microscopic vasectomy reversal operation has brought advantages to family planning and sexual health. High throughput return of fertility, without any need for Assisted Reproductive technique (ART), placed this technique in the first step of fertility for those who underwent a vasectomy in the past.
Alongside microsurgical tools and procedures, ongoing advances, the outcomes of this technique have been improved. Comparing outcomes of VV in end-to-end and side-to-end types of three-layer VV technique showed 31% to 85% outcomes, with a 35% mean of the fertility rate. The same pattern can be seen in the Jee and Hong study (
11), which reported 72 % patency rate and 28 % pregnancy rate in monolayer microsurgery while these rates increased in microsurgical technique (96% and 40% respectively). Using Microsurgery, we observed a 94% patency rate (51/54) that was in agreement with Hsieh et al. and Lee et al. (
12) results (96% and 93 %, respectively) (
12,
13). Also, this result was higher than the Safarinejad et al. (
7) report (82.3%). Similar to Safarinejad et al. (
7), we observed no significant difference in pregnancy rate. Although Safarinejad et al. (
7) concluded that this is related to parameters such as partner features (age, fertility status), but we have matched groups. The homology in our results may be a reflection of our limited records that make a definitive conclusion hard.
Sperm leakage, mainly in a monolayer subtype of VV, is one of the most important complications of the VV technique that gets the surgeons’ attention (
11). One of the advantages of the 2-layer anastomosis is the control and prevention of this problem. In our study, the MDLT-VV technique, by providing a perfect seal of the internal layer and facilitated layer connection, prevents any leakage. Also, Safarinejad et al. (
7) pointed out the negative effect of non-absorbable suture material on the long-term patency after VV, while in approximately 5 years of follow up, we have no similar report.
Although significant differences were not observed between the 2 techniques in the present study, patients satisfactory associated with shorter operation time, made MTLV-VV interested.