Advertisement

Probability of pregnancy after sterilization: a comparison of hysteroscopic versus laparoscopic sterilization

      Abstract

      Objective

      To compare the expected probability of pregnancy after hysteroscopic versus laparoscopic sterilization based on available data using decision analysis.

      Study design

      We developed an evidence-based Markov model to estimate the probability of pregnancy over 10 years after three different female sterilization procedures: hysteroscopic, laparoscopic silicone rubber band application and laparoscopic bipolar coagulation. Parameter estimates for procedure success, probability of completing follow-up testing and risk of pregnancy after different sterilization procedures were obtained from published sources.

      Results

      In the base case analysis at all points in time after the sterilization procedure, the initial and cumulative risk of pregnancy after sterilization is higher in women opting for hysteroscopic than either laparoscopic band or bipolar sterilization. The expected pregnancy rates per 1000 women at 1 year are 57, 7 and 3 for hysteroscopic sterilization, laparoscopic silicone rubber band application and laparoscopic bipolar coagulation, respectively. At 10 years, the cumulative pregnancy rates per 1000 women are 96, 24 and 30, respectively. Sensitivity analyses suggest that the three procedures would have an equivalent pregnancy risk of approximately 80 per 1000 women at 10 years if the probability of successful laparoscopic (band or bipolar) sterilization drops below 90% and successful coil placement on first hysteroscopic attempt increases to 98% or if the probability of undergoing a hysterosalpingogram increases to 100%.

      Conclusion

      Based on available data, the expected population risk of pregnancy is higher after hysteroscopic than laparoscopic sterilization. Consistent with existing contraceptive classification, future characterization of hysteroscopic sterilization should distinguish “perfect” and “typical” use failure rates.

      Implications

      Pregnancy probability at 1 year and over 10 years is expected to be higher in women having hysteroscopic as compared to laparoscopic sterilization.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Contraception
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • EngenderHealth
        Contraceptive sterilization: global issues and trends. EngenderHealth, New York, NY2002: 17-64
        • Peterson H.B.
        Sterilization.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2008; 111: 189-203
        • Jones J.
        • Mosher W.
        • Daniels K.
        Current contraceptive use in the United States, 2006–2010, and changes in patterns of use since 1995.
        Natl Health Stat Rep. 2012; 60: 1-25
        • Mosher W.D.
        • Jones J.
        Use of contraception in the United States: 1982–2008.
        Vital Health Stat 23. 2010; : 1-44
        • Conceptus
        Essure permanent birth control.
        (Available at:) (Retrieved March 25, 2013.)
        • Shavell V.I.
        • Abdallah M.E.
        • Shade Jr., G.H.
        • Diamond M.P.
        • Berman J.M.
        Trends in sterilization since the introduction of Essure hysteroscopic sterilization.
        J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2009; 16: 22-27
        • Connor V.F.
        Essure: a review six years later.
        J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2009; 16: 282-290
        • Duffy S.
        • Marsh F.
        • Rogerson L.
        • Hudson H.
        • Cooper K.
        • Jack S.
        • et al.
        Female sterilisation: a cohort controlled comparative study of ESSURE versus laparoscopic sterilisation.
        BJOG. 2005; 112: 1522-1528
        • Ubeda A.
        • Labastida R.
        • Dexeus S.
        Essure: a new device for hysteroscopic tubal sterilization in an outpatient setting.
        Fertil Steril. 2004; 82: 196-199
        • Shavell V.I.
        • Abdallah M.E.
        • Diamond M.P.
        • Kmak D.C.
        • Berman J.M.
        Post-Essure hysterosalpingography compliance in a clinic population.
        J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2008; 15: 431-434
        • Shavell V.I.
        • Abdallah M.E.
        • Diamond M.P.
        • Berman J.M.
        Placement of a permanent birth control device at a university medical center.
        J Reprod Med. 2009; 54: 218-222
        • Savage U.K.
        • Masters S.J.
        • Smid M.C.
        • Hung Y.Y.
        • Jacobson G.F.
        Hysteroscopic sterilization in a large group practice: experience and effectiveness.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2009; 114: 1227-1231
        • Levie M.
        • Chudnoff S.G.
        Prospective analysis of office-based hysteroscopic sterilization.
        J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2006; 13: 98-101
        • Sinha D.
        • Kalathy V.
        • Gupta J.K.
        • Clark T.J.
        The feasibility, success and patient satisfaction associated with outpatient hysteroscopic sterilisation.
        BJOG. 2007; 114: 676-683
        • Levie M.
        • Chudnoff S.G.
        A comparison of novice and experienced physicians performing hysteroscopic sterilization: an analysis of an FDA-mandated trial.
        Fertil Steril. 2011; 96: 643e1-648e1
        • Chen B.A.
        • Hayes J.L.
        • Reeves M.F.
        • Creinin M.D.
        Outcomes of transcervical hysteroscopic sterilization in an urban academic medical center.
        Contraception. 2009; 80: 205
        • Kerin J.F.
        • Carignan C.S.
        • Cher D.
        The safety and effectiveness of a new hysteroscopic method for permanent birth control: results of the first Essure pbc clinical study.
        Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2001; 41: 364-370
        • Kerin J.F.
        • Cooper J.M.
        • Price T.
        • Herendael B.J.
        • Cayuela-Font E.
        • Cher D.
        • et al.
        Hysteroscopic sterilization using a micro-insert device: results of a multicentre Phase II study.
        Hum Reprod. 2003; 18: 1223-1230
        • Cooper J.M.
        • Carignan C.S.
        • Cher D.
        • Kerin J.F.
        • Selective Tubal Occlusion Procedure 2000 Investigators Group
        Microinsert nonincisional hysteroscopic sterilization.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2003; 102: 59-67
        • Nichols M.
        • Carter J.F.
        • Fylstra D.L.
        • Childers M.
        • Essure System U.S. Post-Approval Study Group
        A comparative study of hysteroscopic sterilization performed in-office versus a hospital operating room.
        J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2006; 13: 447-450
        • Andersson S.
        • Eriksson S.
        • Mints M.
        Hysteroscopic female sterilization with Essure in an outpatient setting.
        Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2009; 88: 743-746
        • Miño M.
        • Arjona J.E.
        • Cordón J.
        • Pelegrin B.
        • Povedano B.
        • Chacon E.
        Success rate and patient satisfaction with the Essure sterilisation in an outpatient setting: a prospective study of 857 women.
        BJOG. 2007; 114: 763-766
        • ACOG Committee on Gynecologic Practice
        ACOG Committee Opinion No. 458: hysterosalpingography after tubal sterilization.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2010; 115: 1343-1345
        • Thiel J.A.
        • Carson G.D.
        Cost-effectiveness analysis comparing the essure tubal sterilization procedure and laparoscopic tubal sterilization.
        J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2008; 30: 581-585
        • Gariepy A.M.
        • Creinin M.D.
        • Schwarz E.B.
        • Smith K.J.
        Reliability of laparoscopic compared with hysteroscopic sterilization at 1 year: a decision analysis.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2011; 118: 273-279
        • Hurskainen R.
        • Hovi S.L.
        • Gissler M.
        • Grahn R.
        • Kukkonen-Harjula K.
        • Nord-Saari M.
        • et al.
        Hysteroscopic tubal sterilization: a systematic review of the Essure system.
        Fertil Steril. 2010; 94: 16-19
        • Cleary T.P.
        • Tepper N.K.
        • Cwiak C.
        • Whiteman M.K.
        • Jamieson D.J.
        • Marchbanks P.A.
        • et al.
        Pregnancies after hysteroscopic sterilization: a systematic review.
        Contraception. 2013; 87: 539-548
        • Povedano B.
        • Arjona J.E.
        • Velasco E.
        • Monserrat J.A.
        • Lorente J.
        • Castelo-Branco C.
        Complications of hysteroscopic Essure(®) sterilisation: report on 4306 procedures performed in a single centre.
        BJOG. 2012; 119: 795-799
        • Destefano F.
        • Greenspan J.R.
        • Dicker R.C.
        • Peterson H.B.
        • Strauss L.T.
        • Rubin G.L.
        Complications of interval laparoscopic tubal sterilization.
        Obstet Gynecol. 1983; 61: 153-158
        • Conceptus
        Essure permanent birth control.
        (Available at:) (Retrieved March 25, 2013.)
        • Kost K.
        • Singh S.
        • Vaughan B.
        • Trussell J.
        • Bankole A.
        Estimates of contraceptive failure from the 2002 National Survey of Family Growth.
        Contraception. 2008; 77: 10-21
        • Trussell J.
        Contraceptive failure in the United States.
        Contraception. 2011; 83: 397-404
        • Peterson H.B.
        • Xia Z.
        • Hughes J.M.
        • Wilcox L.S.
        • Tylor L.R.
        • Trussell J.
        The risk of pregnancy after tubal sterilization: findings from the U.S. Collaborative Review of Sterilization.
        Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996; 174: 1161-1168
        • Levy B.
        • Levie M.D.
        • Childers M.E.
        A summary of reported pregnancies after hysteroscopic sterilization.
        J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2007; 14: 271-274
        • Peterson H.B.
        • Xia Z.
        • Wilcox L.S.
        • Tylor L.R.
        • Trussell J.
        Pregnancy after tubal sterilization with bipolar electrocoagulation. U.S. Collaborative Review of Sterilization Working Group.
        Obstet Gynecol. 1999; 94: 163-167