Feasibility of Essure Placement in Intrauterine Device Users

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.

A Meta-Analysis of Bilateral Essure® Procedural Placement Success Rates on First Attempt

Background: The Essure® (Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Leverkusen, Germany) female sterilization procedure entails using a hysteroscope to guide a microinsert into the Fallopian tube openings. Failed placement can lead to patient dissatisfaction, repeat procedures, unintended or ectopic pregnancy, perforation of internal organs, or need for subsequent medical interventions. Additional interventions increase women's health risks, and costs for patients and the health care industry. Demonstrated successful placement rates are 63%-100%. To date, there have not been any systematic analyses of variables associated with placement rates. Objectives: The aims of this review were: (1) to estimate the average rate of successful bilateral Essure microinsert placement on first attempt; and (2) to identify variables associated with successful placement. Materials and Methods: A meta-analysis was conducted on 64 published studies and 19 variables. Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, all published studies between November 2001 and February 2015 were reviewed. The studies were taken from from PubMed and Google Scholar, and by using the the "snowball" method that reported variables associated with successful bilateral Essure placement rates. Results: The weighted average rate of successful bilateral microinsert placement on first attempt was 92% (0.92 [95% confidence interval: 0.904-0.931]). Variables associated with successful placements were: (1) newer device models; (2) higher body mass index; and (3) a higher percent of patients who received local anesthesia. Conclusions: The data gathered for this review indicate that the highest bilateral success rates may be obtained by utilizing the newest Essure device model with local anesthesia in heavier patients. More standardized data reporting in published Essure studies is recommended. (J GYNECOL SURG 31:308).

Hysteroscopic sterilization of patient with intrauterine device Mirena®

Tubal sterilization is the definitive procedure most often used worldwide to control fecundity. Laparoscopic ligature is safe, but invasive and with possible surgical and anesthetic risks. The hysteroscopic approach enables tubal occlusion at outpatient's setting without the need of incisions or anesthesia. A microdevice (Essure^®) is inserted directly into the tubes and its polyethelene fibers cause obstruction of tubes in about three months. During this period, it is recommended that patients continue the use of a temporary birth control method. Several women use the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system, which is called in the market as Mirena^®. This report evaluated the possibility of inserting Essure^® without remove the intrauterine device; patient tolerance to the procedure was also assessed. The tubal device was successfully placed in the patient without the need to remove Mirena^®. After three months the intrauterine device was removed with no intercurrent events.

Tubal risk markers for failure to place transcervical sterilization coils

BACKGROUND

There is a growing body of literature on placement rates of the Essure® procedure, yet prior studies have not attempted to identify tubal-associated risk factors for placement failures. The current study examines risk markers associated with the inability to deploy the Essure® coils into the tubal lumen using the new ESS305 design.

STUDY DESIGN

We used electronic medical record data to assess risk markers associated with the inability to place the Essure coils in the tubal lumen using the new ESS305 design. A total of 310 attempted procedures between June 14, 2007, and April 29, 2011, were analyzed.

RESULTS

There were 18 tubal failures (5.8%) out of the 310 attempted procedures. A history of a prior sexually transmitted infection (STI) was associated with tubal failure (odds ratio 2.64, 95% confidence interval 1.01-6.90, p=.048).

CONCLUSIONS

We speculate that the observed association between a prior STI and an inability to place the coil was due to a past history of pelvic inflammatory disease.