Electroejaculation in patients with spinal cord injuries: A 21-year, single-center experience
Publication date
2017-02
Editors
Advisors
Supervisors
Document Type
Article
Metadata
Show full item recordCollections
License
taverne
Abstract
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.
Keywords
anejaculation, assisted reproduction, electroejaculation, male infertility, spinal cord injury, Taverne, Journal Article
Citation
Soeterik, T F W, Veenboer, P W, Oude-Ophuis, R J & Lock, T M 2017, 'Electroejaculation in patients with spinal cord injuries : A 21-year, single-center experience', International Journal of Urology, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 157-161. https://doi.org/10.1111/iju.13249