|
Prostate Cancer Not Related to Vasectomy
Vasectomy Remains a Simple and Safe Method of Birth Control: The Latest Information Regarding Vasectomy and Prostate Cancer
Dr. Eric K. Seaman
MD
Vasectomy is a simple,
safe, and effective means of permanent birth control or sterility.
Each year about one-half million men in the United States choose
vasectomy as their method of birth control.
How a vasectomy works
Sperm are made in the testes and stored in the distal portion of
the epididymis. At the time of ejaculation, sperm travel through
the vas deferens out through the ejaculatory ducts, (joined by fluid
from the prostate and seminal vesicles) and out through the urethra.
A vasectomy divides the vas and interrupts the sperm from getting
to the ejaculatory ducts. Because most of the fluid in the ejaculate
is made in the seminal vesicles and prostate, even after vasectomy,
the ejaculate volume will be maintained.
The vasectomy procedure:
Vasectomy is generally performed in the office. The procedure takes
about 30 minutes. Patients are given a local anesthetic and a sedative
by mouth. No-scalpel vasectomy techniques have been popularized;
however, the major difference of this technique is to use a sharp
clamp, rather than a scalpel to make the skin opening. A portion
of the vas is generally removed. The ends of the vas are clipped
and sealed by heat (cauterized) to prevent auto-reversal. It takes
about fifteen ejaculations to clean out all the residual sperm from
the ejaculatory ducts. Two negative semen analyses are required
after the procedure before patients are allowed to have unprotected
relations.
Vasectomy and Prostate
Cancer
In the past 10 years, there have been 14 major studies investigating
a possible relationship between vasectomy and prostate cancer have
been published. These studies were reviewed in the August, 1998
issue of Fertility and Sterility (Bernal-Delgado et al; p 191-200).
Only 6 studies found a statistically significant association; however,
all of the studies were found to have significant methodologic problems,
especially the 6 studies.
Methodologic
problems included bias in selection of study participants, in obtaining
information about the participants and in confounding the vasectomy-prostate
cancer relationship. For example, men who have their vasectomy performed
by a urologist may be see a urologist more often than men who have
not, and therefore may have an assymptomatic cancer picked up ealier.
Studies of mortality after vasectomy suggest that men who undergo
vasectomy in the US may in general, be healthier than their counterparts
who do not (Giovannucci et al, NEJM 1992:326:1392).
Finally, there is little
evidence for a possible biologic explanation as to why the 2 might
be associated. For example, vasectomy has been reported to increase
serum testosterone, but such increases are small if they occur at
all and serum levels stay within the normal range. Antisperm antibodies
are also generated after vasectomy; however any implication of their
role in initiating carcinogenesis is yet to be proven.
The Controversy about
the possible association began with a hospital based case control
study. 220 men diagnosed with prostate cancer were compared with
2 control groups: one group consisted of men admitted for taurma
or appendicitis. Comparison with this group revealed a relative
risk of 5.3; there is an obvious confounding variable, here, in
that the control group might be inappropriate because of the tendency
to include younger patients or patients who might not seek vasectomy.
(Guess HA: Am J Epidemiol, 1990:132:1062)
Sidney et al performed
a cohort study of members o the Northern California Kaiser Permanente
Medical Care Program. The study compared 5332 men with a history
of vasectomy with 3 times as many non-vasectomized men match for
age race marital status and date and location of the examination.
The relative risk discovered for the 2 groups was 1.0. However,
Giovannucci subsequently reported 2 cohort studies revealing an
increased relative risk for vasectomized men. One study was a retrospective
review based on husbands of women in the Nurse's' health study.
The history of vasectomy and of cancer was obtained from the wives.
29214 subjects were involved with study and a relative risk of 1.6
was reported for vasectomized individuals.
Publication of
the 2 Giovannucci studies prompted the NIH to convene an expert
panel to provide recommendations to clinicians and public health
authorities based on all available biologic and epidemiologic
evidence concerning vasectomy and prostate cancer. The panel concluded
that the associations that have been found are weak and that detection
bias cannot be ruled out. They reported the following conclusions
(Healy B: JAMA 1993;269:2620)
- Health-care providers
should continue to offer vasectomy and perform the procedure
- Vasectomy reversal
is not warranted to prevent prostate cancer.
- Screening for prostate
cancer should not be any different for men who have had a vasectomy
than for those who have not.
|