Post-ablation tubal sterilization syndrome: Does route of sterilization matter?

OBJECTIVE: To compare the prevalence of clinical post-ablation tubal sterilization syndrome among women who underwent abdominal (i.e., peripartum or laparoscopic) vs hysteroscopic permanent contraception in addition to endometrial ablation. STUDY DESIGN: This study was a retrospective cohort study conducted at an academic medical center. We included women (N = 188) who successfully underwent both endometrial ablation and permanent contraception between 2005 and 2017. Forty-one women underwent hysteroscopic permanent contraception and 147 underwent abdominal (i.e., peripartum or laparoscopic) permanent contraception. The primary outcome was the prevalence of clinical post-ablation tubal sterilization syndrome, as defined by new or worsening cyclic pelvic pain after completion of both procedures. RESULTS: The overall prevalence of the syndrome was 19.1% (34 of 178 women who followed up), with no detected difference between those who underwent hysteroscopic (6 of 38, 15.8%) vs abdominal permanent contraception (28 of 140, 20.0%, p = 0.55). In multivariate regression modeling, when adjusted for race, parity, gynecologic pathologies, hormonal medication use, and the presence of baseline pain (both pelvic and non-pelvic) only younger patient age was marginally associated with increased odds of the syndrome (aOR 1.85, 95% CI 1.01- 3.45, p = 0.05), while abdominal as compared to hysteroscopic permanent contraception was not (aOR 1.29, 95% CI 0.59-2.84, p = 0.53). Of the 28 patients with clinical post-ablation tubal sterilization syndrome who underwent hysterectomy and/or salpingectomy as treatment for their pain, none showed signs of hematosalpinx or hematometra at the time of surgery or on final pathology. CONCLUSION: We did not find evidence that route of permanent contraception affects the risk of post-ablation tubal sterilization syndrome development. Younger patients may be at higher risk of this syndrome.

Current techniques and outcomes in hysteroscopic sterilization: current evidence, considerations, and complications with hysteroscopic sterilization micro inserts.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To describe the current data regarding effectiveness, complications, postoperative evaluation, and surgical interventions associated with Essure hysteroscopic sterilization. RECENT FINDINGS: Hysteroscopic sterilization is a commonly performed procedure that is offered as a well tolerated, effective, outpatient method of permanent sterilization. Over the past several years, concerns have been raised regarding correct placement and postoperative complications. This has led to statements by both the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in October, 2016 and American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists in February, 2017, as a significant portion of women seek removal of these devices. A current black-box warning issued by the FDA in 2016 recommends discussion of 'the probabilities of rates or events' of adverse outcomes associated with Essure placement. SUMMARY: Although hysteroscopic sterilization is usually a safe, effective option for permanent contraception, new evidence regarding complications has emphasized the need for proper education and counseling. Appropriate patient selection and knowledge of potential complications is paramount to ensuring patients, and medical providers are well informed and have realistic expectations regarding potential placement and postoperative issues.