Post Vasectomy Pain Forum

Vaselgel and/or RISUG may shed some light on what's really going on

I thought I’d start a thread about vaselgel because thinking about it leads my mind to some interesting thoughts, and places.

It will be interesting to see how the statistical data pans out if, and/or when the world gets to the point where it has decades worth of data regarding outcomes from vaselgel. For those that don’t know what that is, Google it.

Obviously vaselgel will still carry all the risks, and complications of the congestion end of the spectrum, but if they are preformed properly under doplar, ultrasound, etc, the risks should be a lot lower on the immediate nerve damage end of things, amongst other complications that are related to cutting, cauterization, scarring, etc, etc.

From my point of view, the whole “is it congestion or nerve damage” topics that exist now, and have for decades may have a bit of light shed on the whole subject far as what’s causing what if technology actually makes it that far on a grand scale. But will it ever make it that far?

The idea of “safer” doesn’t mean nobody will suffer immediate injuries from a simple needle inserted into the vas, and a substance injected into it to cause an obstruction, and thus sterilizing a man.

They claim vaselgel will be reversible, but time will tell how successful that will pan out to be as well. Something tells me there will be issues on several levels, and even if the reversible aspect about it works, some men will be so damaged by back pressure, etc, etc, there will undoubtedly be failures, and/or complications that will be similar, and/or the same as vasectomy.

We have at least one member on this site that works with needles very regular, and has already told on himself that he has in fact hit a nerve with a needle before. Seems he said these people did get better over a period of many months, or better.

Anyway, it will certainly be interesting to see how vaselgel pans out far as it’s own version of pvps, the symptoms, the severity, autoimmune issues, etc, etc, but unfortunately many of us will be old, or dead by then.

They still are cutting on you and extracting the vas deferens as of now so in my mind it will carry the same risks as vasectomy. It is only slightly less destructive in that they don’t dissect the vas deferens.

“VasalgelTM is a long-acting, nonhormonal contraceptive with a significant advantage over vasectomy: it is likely to be more reversible. The procedure is similar to a no-scalpel vasectomy, except a gel is injected into the vas deferens (the tube the sperm swim through), rather than cutting the vas (as is done in vasectomy).”

Note they are hyping that “It is likely to be more reversible” as the primary advantage.

No thanks.

Your perspective about this is interesting @MikeO, and I’m surprised you don’t see what I’m getting at.

I definitely find vaselgel to be far less destructive far as the cutting, cauterization, and a bunch of other questionable destructive terminology that you are definitely well aware of that goes along with performing closed ended vasectomy, open ended vasectomy, options, etc.

Theres guys on this forum that seem to beleive cutting on the scrotal skin is just as dangerous as what I mentioned above, but I tend to disagree that cutting on the scrotal skin is where the majority of the problems occur.

I have a scar on my scrotom from complications that happened during my first reversal that left a scar on my sack that looks like a huge vagina. I have further scarring from the incision made during my redo reversal. That incision went a bit higher, and scarred a bit, but nothing like the first time. I don’t have any pain, nor discomfort associated with anything I just described.

Pulling the vas deferens out if the scrotom certainly doesn’t carry the risks of vasectomy either.

I thought what I had to say was interesting as I was brain storming about it, but I guess you don’t, lol.

And yes, I understand that it’s a bunch of hype. I certainly wasn’t promoting vaselgel either.

I’m just saying it’s misleading because if you don’t read the fine print you might believe they do it all with a needle. I think a lot of the damage is done tearing through not only the scrotal skin if, like in my case, it’s done to high or too close to the base of the penis, but more importantly through the layers of the spermatic cord. There are nerves and blood vessels and layers of fascia and muscle that normally just glide over one another. Surely cutting and cauterizing have the potential to make things worse but I believe just puncturing the scrotum and spermatic cord and pulling out the vas through a hole in the skin is probably all it takes to mess up some guys. When they figure out how to do it without cutting it will be good to go but it will be very expensive because the equipment and skill involved will be much greater. Any monkey with a couple of basic tools can perform a vasectomy. That’s why they are cheap and that’s part of the huge appeal to medical professionals that can turn a quick buck for 15 minutes of work.

To “undo” it I am assuming you need a guy to do the same thing to you in reverse which is more potential for scar tissue etc…

Well, I never mislead anyone in my first post here as I mentioned doplar, and ultrasound guided. Certainly no man would believe it was possible, let alone allow anyone to stick a needle into their scrotom, and hope to hit the inner lumen of a vas deferens with, or without guidance.

If you think that one of the leading, or common causes of pvps is because they poke holes in a man’s scrotom, I’m going to say I’ve never read about it in any pvps study I’ve ever read.

If anyone thinks it’s because urologists pull the vas deferens out of the hole they poked, I’ve never read any pvps studies that suggested that before either. Edit: unless you are referring to “rough surgery”, and I’m not sure if that’s exactly pvps, and generally speaking, those guys are messed up from day one.

Cutting way to high, yes, I’m aware that you feel this happened you, and that you were cut way to high (bilateral incisions), but I’ve thought a lot about that over time, and if that’s the case, you should be able to see evidence of this in the pictures you got of your repairs from Dr Marks. You should’ve been sectioned high as well, but not necessarily 100%.

I was cut high during my redo reversal, and I didn’t experience complications, and I suppose I’m lucky for that.

You’ve also mentioned in countless posts that you think your pvps is related to facial interposition, which has nothing to do with cutting way up high.

Honestly, I have no idea what’s happened to you, and I’ve told you that pm, and open forum. It’s a wonder tho, and I do think about it.

Honestly, this conversation has went into a realm I really didn’t expect. I was hoping to hear something interesting, or perhaps something that was relevant to what I was saying.

Keep in mind that I was the first to mention vaselgel in the “we don’t know what causes pvps, yea right” thread. Doing research, and talking about it isn’t a first for me.

@MikeO, I think cases like yours may be more related to medical malpractice, and/or negligence, but idk, that doesn’t really go along with your story, and/or timeline either.

I’ve also read more than one story regarding scrotal skin pain, but in the slew of pvps stories I’ve read, skin pain isn’t something I read about often.

You didn’t develop pvps for years post vasectomy either. I know I’ve read that many times. Once again, I’m not sure what you got going on, but it’s not good.

I think a VAST majority of PVPS is from injury. Either nerve, artery, or lymph damage. I really see no reason why they couldn’t do a “no cut” vaselgel vasectomy but they’ll likely start by teasing out the vas deferens.

That’s interesting @Choohooo Your thoughts are not a surprise, and I appreciate your response as it’s relevant to what I was getting at.

Unfortunately, I don’t know of a single pvps, vasectomy pain, etc study that reflects your opinion that the “vast majority” of pvps cases are related the reasons you listed. I know you’ve thought to write a study, and I think you should.

Remember what I said regarding how I felt when I came on the pvps scene many years ago, and had a hard time understanding why the congestion guys, nerve damage guy’s, complicated situations guy’s, rough surgery guys, etc were all being put into one category, and referred to as pvps guys. That’s just way to wide of a spectrum far as a “syndrome” goes for me, and that should be easy to understand.

Anyway, I appreciate the fact that you understand where my thoughts were going far as vaselgel may shed some light on what’s really going on, and if they were done properly, it would likely change the current status quo, assumptions, etc.

I think it’s a technology issue at this point. That sort of guided imaging likely does not exist right now as the lumen is very small. I think this would probably be a good procedure for a robot of some kind one day. If they invented some sort of contraption that could isolate a man’s vas deferens and very precisely guide a needle in there I can see the potential to get good outcomes with it. The problem is developing that sort of machine would cost a lot and the skill to use it would cost a lot as well. Your average Joe blow hack is not going to be able to do this. We have guys here that have had veins harvested which is just terrible.

I want to apologize to Ringo if I jacked the thread. I agree it will be interesting to follow this as we get old assuming we live that much longer, lol. I just didn’t think a discussion about Vasagel would be complete at this point if we did not mention it is similar to a vasectomy minus the dissection.

It’ll get there soon enough. I don’t know if you’ve ever seen a vasectomy done but often times they’re able to tease the vas deferens out to just below the scrotal surface. Now, if they are able to inject gel into the vas without cutting it, why couldn’t they do the same thing through the scrotal tissue without puncturing it?

It would take some technique. Warm compress on the scrotum to prevent shrinkage, etc. all they would need is a little barium sulfate to the mix for radiopacity and they could verify placement with an X-ray.

I’m secretly hopefully that once an alternative is released, some truth will come out about vasectomy. I’m also curious to see if congestive granulomas become an issue with vaselgel as well.

I personally think RISUG in India shows A LOT more promise than vaselgel as there is no inhibition of fluid. Requires a vas-like surgery however.

I’m going to tell you the same thing I did before far as that possible future study of yours goes.

The old school, and all those that came before you, wrote countless published studies, ran website’s, wrote books, all the data we have up to this point, etc, etc can’t be all wrong. From my POV, that stuff is very likely to be considerably more right than wrong.

No doubt you could write a study that reflects on nerve damage, arterial damage, lymph damage, and you might even throw rough surgery into it. Providing you could back it all up with references, actual data, and/or facts, you may have something that was actually publishable, and presentable.

I should’ve mentioned RISUG as well, or any male sterilization procedure that doesn’t involve cutting the vas deferens, cauterization, metal hemoclips, metal clamps, crushing the vas deferens, other destructive stuff to the vas deferens, etc.

I don’t do a lot of vasectomy research anymore. The little I actually do, I do it for people here far as wiki pages, literature, studies, etc.

I’m beyond sitting around researching vasectomy stuff all the time, my days of doing that all the time ended years ago. I learn from this place still, and that’s enough. Tack on answering posts, PM’s, etc, I spend enough time spinning in this stuff.

Yes, of course I’ve watched YouTube videos related to vasectomy procedures, corrective procedures, etc, etc. I still see a thing or two when I’m researching for members looking for data that’s relevant to my posts, etc.

I still say it will be interesting to see what happens, what the symptoms will be far as a version of pvps, painful complications, etc with the procedures we are talking about here.

Time will tell, but the data should answer some long awaited questions.

I just edited the title of this post to include RISUG.

@Choohooo, I’d be curious to know where your getting your information at far as the RISUG data you spoke of in India goes. I certainly wouldn’t trust an IUA?, or their government to tell all.

Look at our AUA’s website, it doesn’t tell a fraction of what we know about. I think it’s quite dishonest, and misleading at minimum. As you know, our AUA quotes considerably lower statistics on pvps in comparison to the CUA, and NHS. I’m not sure what’s going on with that, and can think of several reasons for why they are so different.

Perhaps the best way to find out what’s really going on regarding RISUG in India would be to look for pain forums in that nations internet system. I don’t speak their language, nor read it, so it wouldn’t do me any good if I knew of such a forum, unless it was translatable. Honestly, I know nothing about their internet system.

Initial clinical results look very promising for RISUG:;year=2019;volume=150;issue=1;spage=81;epage=86;aulast=Sharma

If urologists in the “developed” world are still maiming 10,000 - 20,000 men per year while a safe alternative sits on the shelf collecting dust it is a real scandal.

Add to that the fact that reversing RISUG probably costs 2% as much as reversing a vasectomy, is less risky, and potentially results in fewer devastated couples trying and failing their way through IVF and there is just no excuse why the urological community should not be getting this option evaluated and deployed as soon as possible.

Except that they apparently do not give a damn because they are drunk on their own lies about how safe vasectomy is.

Not only that, how many guys out there are a hard no on vasectomy, but would be willing to have a procedure where they do not cut anything out, just inject this flushable polymer? That means holding up this kind of innovation is maybe not just harming men with PVPS, it is harming women whose partners are unwilling to get a vasectomy as well.


Well said @Ethan_Scruples. I couldn’t have said it better myself.

If this procedure is as easily reversible as they make it sound, this alternative to traditional vasectomy is a no brainer on many levels.

I’d guess traditional vasectomy and reversal advocates (surgeons) wouldn’t be to excited about this newer development, and likely brush it’s very existence under the rug. Procedures like RISUG would kill their golden goose/s $ if, or when it went main stream.

The waiting room at the urologist’s office is probably mostly populated by guys with prostatitis and scrotal pain. PVPS guys are really just another normal customer as far as the urologist is concerned. They literally cannot see what the big deal is. The only real difference is that the PVPS guys are 20-30 years younger than the other patients…

1 Like


I don’t want to derail this thread, but given my own personal experience/story, my dad has told me countless times that he never experienced any significant complications from his closed ended vasectomy decades ago. As of more recently, he tells me he would experience pain, tingling, etc at the ends of his vas’s after he would ejaculate for 10-15 years after the fact. I’m like, wtf? Why am I just now hearing about this? We’ve talked about this countless times since my ordeal, and this is the first I’ve heard of him coming clean about his personal account. Good grief.

1 Like

Nobody wants to talk about it. Nobody wants to hear about it. I don’t talk about it to people face to face. I did for a few months and then I clammed up.

My family probably assumes I’m all healed up by now. The only clue my wife has that something is different is that I sleep with a pillow between my legs and we are not intimate very often anymore. Would it make things better between us to make her privy to my stream of consciousness on this topic? No.

This appalling failure of communication is on the doctors primarily. When you buy a bottle of some chemical, the Material Safety Data Sheet is supposed to lay it all out in terms of whether you are going to get cancer or go blind or get poisoned from the stuff. The professionals are supposed to be warning us in unequivocal language. The very idea that we should be reduced to relying on word of mouth warnings is an unacceptable failure.

Instead of professionals taking their responsibility to warn the public seriously, you have this situation:

Watch how Jennifer Berman starts out saying that she has heard about the reduced sensitivity thing from her own patients and feels it is important to warn men that this is possible – and then immediately gets tone policed by Aaron Spitz, who reminds her that the party line is that men should give it time – at least a year! – for things to return to normal. I’d guess guys who have been dealing with a poor quality orgasm for a year are pretty unlikely to return to their doctor just to whine about something they intuitively guess cannot be fixed. After a year, can you really even remember how good things used to feel?

Even just giving men that watered down warning he is willing to grant on camera – “It may take a year for your orgasm to return to normal” would cause many men to bolt for the door during their consultation. They don’t withold the warning because men would not find it relevant. They withold the warning because they are concerned that if the man is warned, he might not take the risk they think the man ought to take. Which is a significant human rights violation in my opinion.

The state of affairs will change if RISUG is successful and we move over to it. Predictably, urologists who offer RISUG will be talking much more clearly and candidly about how it’s a better option than vasectomy because it doesn’t cause chronic pain or reduced orgasm sensation or other problems known to be associated with vasectomy.