Electroejaculation Versus Vibratory Stimulation in Spinal Cord Injured Men

Sperm Quality and Patient Preference

Ohl, Dana A.
Sonksen, Jens
Menge, Alan C.
McCabe, Marcianna
Keller, Laura M.

From the Department of Surgery, Section of Urology and the Laboratory for Assisted Reproductive Technology, University of Michigan Medical Center, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Accepted for publication December 20, 1996.
(Ohl) Requests for reprints: Section of Urology, 1500 E. Medical Center Dr., Box 0330, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-0330.

Journal of Urology 157(6):p 2147-2149, June 1997.

Purpose

We compared semen quality and patient preference between penile vibratory stimulation and electroejaculation in spinal cord injured men.

Materials and Methods

We treated 11 spinal cord injured men with penile vibratory stimulation and electroejaculation in random order. End points examined were semen analysis, sperm functional assessment, and patient pain scores (1 to 10) and preferred procedure. Differences between the procedures were determined with the paired Student t test.

Results

There was no difference in antegrade sperm count but penile vibratory stimulation specimens had greater motility (26.0 versus 10.7%), viability (25.2 versus 9.7%) and motile sperm count (185.0 x 10⁶ versus 97.0 x 10⁶). The retrograde sperm count was greater (but not significant) in electroejaculation patients. The total (antegrade plus retrograde) and motile sperm counts were not different. There was no difference in immunobead test (all negative), cervical mucus penetration or sperm penetration assay, although the percent hamster egg penetration approached significance (53.7% for penile vibratory stimulation versus 22.1% for electroejaculation, p = 0.06). There was no difference in the peak blood pressures and no complications were noted. Pain scores were significantly greater for electroejaculation compared to penile vibratory stimulation (5.2 versus 1.7, respectively). All patients preferred penile vibratory stimulation.

Conclusions

There was a slight advantage in sperm quality and a high patient preference in favor of penile vibratory stimulation. Penile vibratory stimulation should be attempted first to induce ejaculation in spinal cord injured men, with electroejaculation reserved for failures.