4.3 Article

Electroejaculation in patients with spinal cord injuries: A 21-year, single-center experience

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF UROLOGY
Volume 24, Issue 2, Pages 157-161

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/iju.13249

Keywords

anejaculation; assisted reproduction; electroejaculation; male infertility; spinal cord injury

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives: To evaluate treatment results of electroejaculation in patients with spinal cord injuries and the additional value of repeated electroejaculation. Methods: We carried out a retrospective chart analysis of all spinal cord injury patients treated with electroejaculation at University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands, from January 1994 to July 2015. Data were collected on the patients' demographics and medical history. We evaluated sperm quality according to World Health Organization standards, pregnancy and delivery rates. Results: A total of 230 electroejaculation procedures were carried out in 47 patients. In 227 of 230 electroejaculations (98.7%), an ejaculate could be obtained. In 169 of 230 (73.5%) electroejaculation procedures, it was possible to yield semen containing progressively motile spermatozoa. In 18 of 47 (38.3%) patients, no semen of sufficient quality could be yielded during the first electroejaculation. Repeated electroejaculation resulted in ejaculates containing progressively motile spermatozoa in seven of 18 (38.9%) of these men. Procreation was attempted through in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection in 17 couples; of these, 14 of 17 (82.4%) couples achieved pregnancy. Conclusions: In the majority of spinal cord injury patients treated with electroejaculation, it is possible to obtain semen that can be used for assisted reproductive technologies. Repeated electroejaculation should be considered when the first procedure fails.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available