Abstract
Objective
Hysteroscopic sterilization (HS) has become one of the most common permanent contraception
methods in the U.S. However, recent evidence suggests that the failure rate may be
higher than previously reported. We describe women with a history of HS presenting
for abortion at a 3-site urban abortion clinic.
Study design
Retrospective case series of patients with previous HS who presented to a 3-site urban
abortion clinic for pregnancy termination from October 2012 to February 2015.
Results
In 28 months, 9 patients with prior HS had failure of the method and then an abortion.
Conclusions
This study identifies a number of failures from a setting previously unaccounted.
It suggests that perhaps the failure rate is higher than previously reported. The
cases here presented, from a 3-site urban abortion clinic over 28 months, almost match and sometimes surpass the number of failures reported in multicenter
case series in the literature. Surveys of other abortion clinics in the U.S. and elsewhere
might also discover other patients whose HS had failed.
Implications
We identified a number of hysteroscopic sterilization failures at termination of pregnancy
at a 3-site urban abortion clinic. We hypothesize that the HS failure rate underestimates
the true method failure because previous analysis have excluded cases such as these.
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 accessOne-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 ContraceptionAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Use of contraception in the United States: 1982–2008.Vital Health Stat. 2010; 23: 1-44
- Current contraceptive use in the United States, 2006–2010, and changes in patterns of use since.Natl Health Stat Rep. 1995; 2012: 1-25
- Trends in sterilization since the introduction of essure hysteroscopic sterilization.J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2009; 16: 22-27
- Essure Permanent Birth Control.2014
- A 12-month prospective evaluation of transcervical sterilization using implantable polymer matrices.Obstet Gynecol. 2008; 112: 1270-1277
- Probability of pregnancy after sterilization: a comparison of hysteroscopic versus laparoscopic sterilization.Contraception. 2014; 90: 174-181
- Reliability of laparoscopic compared with hysteroscopic sterilization at 1 year: a decision analysis.Obstet Gynecol. 2011; 118: 273-279
- Shifts in intended and unintended pregnancies in the United States, 2001–2008.Am J Public Health. 2014; 104: S43-S48
- Abortion incidence and access to services in the United States, 2008.Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2011; 43: 41-50
- Pregnancies after hysteroscopic sterilization: a systematic review.Contraception. 2013; 87: 539-548
- Hysteroscopic sterilization using a micro-insert device: results of a multicentre phase II study.Hum Reprod. 2003; 18: 1223-1230
- Microinsert nonincisional hysteroscopic sterilization.Obstet Gynecol. 2003; 102: 59-67
- Analysis of tubal patency after essure placement.J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2013; 20: 468-472
- ACOG Committee opinion No. 458: hysterosalpingography after tubal sterilization.Obstet Gynecol. 2010; 115: 1343-1345
- Twelve-year retrospective review of unintended pregnancies after Essure sterilization in the Netherlands.Fertil Steril. 2016;
- Efficacy of essure hysteroscopic sterilization–5 years follow up of 1200 women.Gynecol Endocrinol. 2013; 29: 580-582
- A summary of reported pregnancies after hysteroscopic sterilization.J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2007; 14: 271-274
- Analysis of adverse events with essure hysteroscopic sterilization reported to the manufacturer and user facility device experience database.J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2013; 20: 825-829
- Descriptive studies: what they can and cannot do.Lancet. 2002; 359: 145-149
- Abortion as stigma: cognitive and emotional implications of concealment.J Pers Soc Psychol. 1999; 77: 735-745
Article info
Publication history
Published online: March 19, 2016
Accepted:
February 28,
2016
Received in revised form:
February 22,
2016
Received:
November 5,
2015
Identification
Copyright
© 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
