Original research article| Volume 94, ISSUE 1, P78-80, July 2016

Download started.


Pregnancy following hysteroscopic sterilization at an Urban Abortion Clinic- A case series: Are We looking in the wrong places?



      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.


      In 28 months, 9 patients with prior HS had failure of the method and then an abortion.


      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.


      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.


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


        • Mosher W.D.
        • Jones J.
        Use of contraception in the United States: 1982–2008.
        Vital Health Stat. 2010; 23: 1-44
        • Jones J.
        • Mosher W.
        • Daniels K.
        Current contraceptive use in the United States, 2006–2010, and changes in patterns of use since.
        Natl Health Stat Rep. 1995; 2012: 1-25
        • Shavell V.I.
        • Abdallah M.E.
        • Shade 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
        • Bayer
        Essure Permanent Birth Control.
        • Vancaillie T.G.
        • Anderson T.L.
        • Johns D.A.
        A 12-month prospective evaluation of transcervical sterilization using implantable polymer matrices.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2008; 112: 1270-1277
        • Gariepy A.M.
        • Creinin M.D.
        • Smith K.J.
        • Xu X.
        Probability of pregnancy after sterilization: a comparison of hysteroscopic versus laparoscopic sterilization.
        Contraception. 2014; 90: 174-181
        • 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
        • Finer L.B.
        • Zolna M.R.
        Shifts in intended and unintended pregnancies in the United States, 2001–2008.
        Am J Public Health. 2014; 104: S43-S48
        • Jones R.K.
        • Kooistra K.
        Abortion incidence and access to services in the United States, 2008.
        Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2011; 43: 41-50
        • Cleary T.P.
        • Tepper N.K.
        • Cwiak C.
        • MK Whiteman
        • Jamieson DJ
        • Marchbanks PA
        • et al.
        Pregnancies after hysteroscopic sterilization: a systematic review.
        Contraception. 2013; 87: 539-548
        • Kerin J.F.
        • Cooper J.M.
        • Price T.
        • Herendael BJ
        • 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.
        • Group STOPI
        Microinsert nonincisional hysteroscopic sterilization.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2003; 102: 59-67
        • Rodriguez A.M.
        • Kilic G.S.
        • Vu T.P.
        • Kuo Y.F.
        • Breitkopf D.
        • Snyder R.R.
        Analysis of tubal patency after essure placement.
        J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2013; 20: 468-472
        • Practice ACoOaGCoG
        ACOG Committee opinion No. 458: hysterosalpingography after tubal sterilization.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2010; 115: 1343-1345
        • Hitzerd E.
        • Schreuder H.W.
        • Vleugels M.P.
        • Veersema S.
        Twelve-year retrospective review of unintended pregnancies after Essure sterilization in the Netherlands.
        Fertil Steril. 2016;
        • Ríos-Castillo J.E.
        • Velasco E.
        • Arjona-Berral J.E.
        • Monserrat Jordán J.A.
        • Povedano-Cañizares B.
        • Castelo-Branco C.
        Efficacy of essure hysteroscopic sterilization–5 years follow up of 1200 women.
        Gynecol Endocrinol. 2013; 29: 580-582
        • Levy B.
        • Levie M.D.
        • Childers M.E.
        A summary of reported pregnancies after hysteroscopic sterilization.
        J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2007; 14: 271-274
        • Al-Safi Z.A.
        • Shavell V.I.
        • Hobson D.T.
        • Berman J.M.
        • Diamond M.P.
        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
        • Grimes D.A.
        • Schulz K.F.
        Descriptive studies: what they can and cannot do.
        Lancet. 2002; 359: 145-149
        • Major B.
        • Gramzow R.H.
        Abortion as stigma: cognitive and emotional implications of concealment.
        J Pers Soc Psychol. 1999; 77: 735-745