Printable View
Not speaking from experience, but our local family surgery does them on the premises under a local. To have a general means booking in to day surgery, waiting around half the day for your turn etc etc.
DH has said he would rather a general, but I have the same concerns as OP about using them willy-nilly, when a local will suffice.
I had a LLETZ procedure (abnormal cells removed from my cervix) done under a local, and it was no problem, so DH should be able to have a V done under a local too ;)
Lmao LuluHB!
We're in country Vic - the local GPs do them (only a few) only under general. Their reasoning was that under local the men moved around too much!
Totally get that its his bodyand his decision. Just concerned me that he wasnt told about any risks. Cos it's pretty much been my life for the last 10 years - talking about risk no-one gets told about!!! Hard to switch that off sometimes :)
All good, thanks everyone, you've been a great help.
DH is booked in next week to get his :clap: and although he is starting to freak and would like to be knocked out he isnt going to be.
It is being bulk billed so beggars cant be choosers, but it will be a local and I can even watch if I want to.
I am so unsympathetic when it comes to DH and his illnesses or sickness so I am dreading the aftermath. :rolleyes:
DH had his done under a general 5 years ago. It was the best option for the type of procedure he had, which was to actually cut the vans differens (sp?), cauterise the ends and then tie them back on themselves. It was still done only as day surgery and the actual op was less than 30 minutes, so he wasn't under for that long really. As Astrid said, I think the method of vasectomy and it's success rate is more important than being put under or not. We opted for this one because it had such a high success rate as opposed to just clamping the tubes (which is the one they do under a local in the Dr's rooms?). We do not want another pregnancy at all.
DH's procedure: cut tubes, folded one end (one each side) over, stitched it and then tuck it behind a muscle. It is to stop the tubes from rejoining.
DH was just under a local with one of the general surgeons. DD and I went and had an ice cream while it happened, was pretty quick. I think they cut the tubes, no idea if they were folded back or not.
DH was under a local, not sure about the tying back but they definitely removed about 7cm of tube as the doctor showed him the chopped out bit much to DH disgust I think-and DH he couldn't see how could rejoin with that amount missing.
Trill, that's interesting re the cauterize & fold method. That's what my DH had done, but they were still happy to do it under a local because DH asked. But the Dr seemed to derive a bit of amusement from it all ... some of my DH's colleagues are pretty tough dudes, and that Dr does dozens of vasectomies every month for them, but those guys sure aren't queuing up for the local anaesthetics.