Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Jun;117(6):1322-1331.
doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2022.03.001. Epub 2022 Apr 12.

Comparative effectiveness of hysteroscopic and laparoscopic sterilization for women: a retrospective cohort study

Affiliations
Free article

Comparative effectiveness of hysteroscopic and laparoscopic sterilization for women: a retrospective cohort study

Aileen M Gariepy et al. Fertil Steril. 2022 Jun.
Free article

Abstract

Objective: To compare real-world effectiveness of hysteroscopic to laparoscopic sterilization.

Design: Retrospective cohort of Medicaid claims for hysteroscopic or laparoscopic sterilization procedures performed in California, 2008-2014. After excluding postpartum procedures, we applied log-linear (Poisson) event-history regression models for clustered person-period data, weighted for propensity to receive either sterilization procedures, and adjusted for sociodemographic and clinical variables to examine the poststerilization pregnancy rates.

Setting: Clinics, hospitals.

Patient(s): Women aged 18-50 years with Medicaid claims between January 1, 2008, and August 31, 2014.

Intervention(s): Hysteroscopic or laparoscopic sterilization procedure.

Main outcome measure(s): Poststerilization pregnancy measured by pregnancy-related claims.

Result(s): Among women with hysteroscopic (n = 5,906) or laparoscopic (n = 23,965) sterilization, poststerilization pregnancy claims were identified for 4.74% of women after hysteroscopic sterilization and 5.57% after laparoscopic sterilization. The pregnancy rates decreased over time after either procedure. Twelve months after the procedure, the crude incidence of pregnancy claims was higher for hysteroscopic sterilization than for laparoscopic sterilization (3.26 vs. 2.61 per 100 woman-years), but the propensity-weighted adjusted incidence rate ratio was 1.06 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85-1.26). Between 13 and 24 months after the procedure, there were fewer pregnancies for women after hysteroscopic sterilizations than for those after laparoscopic sterilizations (adjusted incidence rate ratio, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.45-0.88]), with no statistically significant differences in later years. The cumulative pregnancy rates 5 years after sterilization were lower with hysteroscopic sterilization than with laparoscopic sterilization (6.26 vs. 7.22 per 100 woman-years; propensity-weighted, adjusted risk ratio, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.62-0.90]). The poststerilization pregnancy rates varied by age and race/ethnicity.

Conclusion(s): The pregnancy rates after female sterilization are higher than expected, whether performed hysteroscopically or laparoscopically. These findings are reassuring that the effectiveness of hysteroscopic sterilization was not inferior to laparoscopic sterilization.

Clinical trial registration number: NCT03438682.

Keywords: Essure; pregnancy; sterilization failure; tubal sterilization.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

Publication types

Associated data