Essure Hysteroscopic Sterilization Versus Interval Laparoscopic Bilateral Tubal Ligation: A Comparative Effectiveness Review

Live birth rate and neonatal outcomes following interventional embolization of hydrosalpinx

BACKGROUND

Hydrosalpinx has a negative effect on the pregnancy outcomes of in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF-ET), and the pretreatment for hydrosalpinx play an important role in improving the outcomes of IVF-ET. This study aimed to investigate the impacts of interventional embolization of hydrosalpinx on the live birth rate and neonatal outcome after in-vitro fertilization.

METHOD

In the present retrospective study, 3351 women receiving the first frozen embryo transfer (FET) after freeze-all policy were reviewed. Patients who received interventional embolization of hydrosalpinx (n = 1268) were included in the study group and those with hydrosalpinx-free bilateral fallopian tube obstruction (n = 2083) in the control group. The primary outcome was live birth (LB) rate; the secondary endpoints included rates of implantation, clinical pregnancy (CP), multiple pregnancy, and pregnancy loss.

RESULTS

The LB rate was similar between embolization group (39.91%) and control group (43.21%) (P > 0.05). The rate of implantation (35.81% vs. 32.24%), CP (50.84% vs. 47%) and multiple pregnancy rate (28.71% vs. 24.16%) in the control group were significantly higher than in the embolization group (P < 0.05). The miscarriage rate (39.91%, vs 43.21%, P > 0.05), ectopic gestation rate (2.35% vs 2.83%, P > 0.05), and ongoing pregnancy rate (41.56% vs 44.89%, P > 0.05) were comparable between two groups. After adjustment for confounding factors, interventional embolization of hydrosalpinx was found to have no influence on the LB rate. The thicker endometrium, more embryos transferred, and transfer of blastocyst stage embryos significantly increased the LB rate and CP rate.

CONCLUSION

The interventional embolization of hydrosalpinx can achieve the LB rate similar to that of hydrosalpinx-free obstruction patients with less risk, less pain and reduced medical cost. Thus, embolization of hydrosalpinx is one of the preferable clinical treatments for patients with hydrosalpinx.

Confirmation of the systematic presence of tin particles in fallopian tubes or uterine horns of Essure implant explanted patients: A study of 18 cases with the same pathological process

OBJECTIVE

To examine associations between local and systemic symptoms and the wear of the tin weld of Essure implants.

DESIGN

study of a series of cases.

SETTINGS

Two French hospitals.

PARTICIPANTS

Eighteen patients explanted by hysterectomy and salpingectomy for removal of their Essure implants between September 2019 and July 2020, have had a common anatomopathological process.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

anatomopathological examination by optical microscopy and mineralogical analysis of the fallopian tube or uterine horn with scanning electron microscopy coupled with energy dispersive X-ray (SEM-EDX). Evaluation of local and systemic symptoms with a questionnaire. Examination of blood metal assays (nickel, chromium, and tin).

RESULTS

anatomopathological examination highlights foreign body granulomas, fibrosis, adenomyosis, nonspecific inflammation, cysts and myomas in the Fallopian tubes, uterine horns, or both and mentions the presence of foreign bodies in seven cases. SEM-EDX analyses showed, systematically, the presence of tin particles integrated in the wall near the weld, generally in clusters, and with a size ranging from about one micron to several dozen microns. The questionnaire shows that the most frequent local symptoms were pelvic pain, urinary disorders, bleeding, and pains during intercourse. The most common systemic symptoms were: asthenia, visual disturbances, amnesia, giddiness, dorsal pains, headaches, and joint pains. The majority of local and systemic symptoms decreased after explantation, but sometimes incompletely. Before explantation, high levels of nickel, tin and chromium were observed in 11/17, 1/7 and 2/17 patients. After explantation, tin levels were high in 3/11 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

our new anatomopathological process systematically demonstrates the presence of tin particles in tissue near the weld. These particles could be responsible for granulomatous inflammations as well as local symptoms. Many of the systemic symptoms are consistent with chronic organotin poisoning but further studies are needed to find out whether tin from the solder can be converted to organotin in the patients' bodies.

Identification of inorganic particles resulting from degradation of ESSURE® implants: Study of 10 cases

OBJECTIVE

Approximately 750,000 women worldwide have undergone ESSURE hysteroscopic sterilization since 2002. In 2015, an increase in adverse effects was noted, with gynaecological and systemic symptoms reported. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) analysis of fallopian tube and uterine horn tissues and implants, after hysterectomy or salpingectomy, revealed the presence of inorganic particles resulting from implant degradation.

STUDY DESIGN

Ten patients (age 42-53 years) were included in this study. Of these, eight patients had undergone hysterectomy and two patients had undergone salpingectomy. Mean exposure time was 85.5 months (standard deviation 26.8 months, range 34-105 months). Mineralogical analyses were performed on 13 tissue biopsies and four implants by SEM coupled with energy dispersive x-ray spectrometry.

RESULTS

In five of the 10 patients, tin particles were observed in fallopian tube or uterine horn tissues with inflammatory cell reactions. In the other five cases, iron, chromium, nickel or platinum particles were observed. For implants, major deterioration of the weld zone was observed with either destroyed appearance or the presence of an organic coating containing numerous particles.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Analysis of the preclinical studies performed by the manufacturer suggests that degradation of the tin weld plays a major role in these adverse events, with increasing leaching and corrosion between 3 and 6 months for an intratubal insert that si designed to remain in an woman's body for her entire life. For patients with gynaecological symptoms (e.g. pain, metrorragies) needing explantation, these findings raise the question of a causal relationship between tin particles from implant degradation and the inflammatory tissue response. For patients with systemic symptoms (e.g. blurred vision, headache, asthenia, myalgia), the hypothesis that these symptoms may be related to the formation of organotin (chemical compounds based on tin with hydrocarbon substituents) in the body has yet to be proven. Tin levels in blood have to be measured before and after explantation. To the authors' knowledge, this is the first study to report significant degradation of the ESSURE implant weld, evidenced by the detection of tin particles in the uterine tissue of patients and comparison of the welding zone between unused and used implants.

Comparing options for women seeking permanent contraception in high-resource countries: a protocol for a systematic review

BACKGROUND

For women seeking permanent contraception, there are a variety of options available including surgical techniques such as tubal ligation or bilateral salpingectomy, in-clinic procedures such as hysteroscopic techniques using micro-inserts, or the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine contraceptive. Despite the various methods available for women who are seeking permanent contraception, there is not a review or decision-making tool that systematically brings together outcomes related to effectiveness, tolerability, adverse effects, non-contraceptive benefits, recovery, or accessibility: all of which are important for shared decision-making between patients and health care providers.

METHODS

We registered our protocol [on Prospero: CRD42016038254] following PRISMA guidelines. A search strategy was created in collaboration with a librarian, and three databases (EMBASE, PubMed, Web of Science) will be searched along with secondary screening of relevant articles. A third reviewer will adjudicate any discrepancies. Data will be extracted independently according to population, intervention, comparison, outcomes (PICOS); length of follow-up; and funding. Articles will be assessed for bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the Cochrane Collaboration tool. If appropriate, a network meta-analysis will be conducted to rank and analyze each method according to each objective. If heterogeneity between studies is too high or it is not possible to conduct a network meta-analysis, a narrative analysis of the study results will be provided.

DISCUSSION

Clinicians and their patients seeking permanent contraception have several options, yet we were unable to find a systematic review or decision support tool helping to facilitate shared decision-making. This systematic review can inform patients, providers, and health policy decision-makers about which options of permanent contraception will meet different reproductive goals according to various outcomes, which can lead to better health, social, economic, and mental well-being for reproductive age women. This can also aid our understanding of resulting costs to the health care system.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42016038254.

Discussion on operative skills in the embolization of hydrosalpinx by hysteroscopic placement of a microcoil

This study aims to discuss the operative skills of hysteroscopic tubal embolization and reduce the occurrence of complications.Ninety-four patients were divided into group A and group B. The main surgical technique in group A: when the inner sleeve is sent to the fallopian tube and no longer accessible (but no >3 cm), remove the guide wire and put into the microcoil. But in group B, there are four major surgical techniques. First, the depth at which the guide wire enters the tube was controlled at 2 cm. Second, the inner diameter of the fallopian tube must be explored to determine the type and shape of the coils. Third, saline should be used to separate the catheter. Fourth, it is to control the release speed of the coils. The superiority of the improved operation method was confirmed by comparing the surgical failure rate, incidence of complications, and cost of surgery before and after the procedure.The reoperation rate of group A was 10% (3/30), while that of group B was 2.68% (3/112). The ectopic microcoils rate of group A was 6.67% (2/30), while that of group B was 0.89% (1/112). The microcoil damages rate of group 23.33% (7/30), while that of group B was 8.04% (9/112). All P values were <.01, and the difference was statistically significant.Hysteroscopic tubal embolization is currently a new surgical procedure to block the fallopian tubes and prevent the reverse flow of fluid in the fallopian tubes into the uterine cavity. After we improved surgical techniques, the surgical failure rate, complication rate, and operation cost of fallopian tube embolization were significantly lower than before the improved method was applied. The improved techniques led to a higher success rate.

Hydrosalpinx - Salpingostomy, salpingectomy or tubal occlusion

Tubal factors account for approximately 25% of cases of infertility, and the most severe manifestation of tubal disease is hydrosalpinx, accounting for 10-30% of tubal diseases. Hydrosalpinx is a distension or dilatation of the fallopian tube in the presence of a distal tubal occlusion, and the most common cause is pelvic inflammatory disease. Women with hydrosalpinges have lower implantation and pregnancy rates in assisted reproductive technology (ART), due to a combination of mechanical and chemical factors thought to disrupt the endometrial environment. Current guidance is removal of the tube by salpingectomy (preferably laparoscopically) before IVF treatment. Salpingostomy, or distal tubal plastic surgery in the management of hydrosalpinx, is an alternative for women desiring natural conception, although ectopic pregnancy rates as high as 10% have been reported. Proximal tubal occlusion with Essure^® devices placed hysteroscopically can be considered particularly in cases of distorted pelvic anatomy or pelvic adhesions making abdominal surgery complex. However, low clinical pregnancy and live birth rates have been reported with the use of these devices before IVF. In this review, we discuss salpingostomy, salpingectomy and tubal occlusion as possible management options for the reproductive women with hydrosalpinx.

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.

Gynecologic Outcomes After Hysteroscopic and Laparoscopic Sterilization Procedures

OBJECTIVE

To compare rates of gynecologic morbidity after laparoscopic and hysteroscopic sterilization.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used a commercial claims administrative database, 2007-2013, to compare rates of pregnancy, menstrual dysfunction, pelvic pain, hysteroscopic surgery, and intra-abdominal gynecologic surgery after laparoscopic and hysteroscopic sterilization. Women with 12 or more continuous months of data before and after their index procedure were included. Pregnancy rates after laparoscopic and hysteroscopic sterilization were compared for the entire population of women who underwent hysteroscopic sterilization and the subset who had completed postprocedure hysterosalpingograms. Cox proportional hazard models were calculated controlling for age, comorbidities, U.S. geographic region, metropolitan statistical area designation, and insurance type.

RESULTS

A total of 42,391 women underwent laparoscopic and 27,724 underwent hysteroscopic sterilization. The pregnancy rate was higher after hysteroscopic than laparoscopic sterilization (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.20, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.09-1.33; 2.4% compared with 2.0% risk of pregnancy at 2 years). Only 66.1% (n=18,318) of women who underwent hysteroscopic sterilization received a hysterosalpingogram. This group had similar pregnancy rates as those who underwent laparoscopic sterilization (adjusted HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.80-1.02; 1.8% compared with 2.0% at 2 years). After undergoing hysteroscopic sterilization, more women were diagnosed with menstrual dysfunction (adjusted HR 1.23, 95% CI 1.20-1.27; 26.8% compared with 22.3% at 2 years), and more women underwent hysteroscopic surgeries (adjusted HR 2.05, 95% CI 1.96-2.14; 13.8% compared with 6.4% at 2 years), but fewer women were diagnosed with pelvic pain (adjusted HR 0.83, P<.001; 21.0% compared with 25.6% at 2 years) and fewer women underwent intra-abdominal gynecologic surgeries (adjusted HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.90-0.99; 7.7% compared with 8.1% at 2 years), including hysterectomy (adjusted HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.61-0.69; 10.9% compared with 14.3% at 5 years).

CONCLUSION

Hysteroscopic sterilization may be associated with a higher rate of pregnancy, more menstrual dysfunction, more hysteroscopic surgeries, less pelvic pain, and fewer intra-abdominal gynecologic surgeries than laparoscopic sterilization. Pregnancy rates appear to be similar for women who completed their postprocedure hysterosalpingogram, but only 66% of women did so.

Contraception: Menarche to Menopause

Contraception services should be part of routine health care maintenance in reproductive-aged women, especially in light of the fact that approximately 50% of pregnancies in the United States remain unplanned. Barrier methods, especially condoms, may play a role in sexually transmitted disease prevention but are less efficacious for pregnancy avoidance. There are several available hormonal contraceptive options, including the combination hormonal pill, progestin-only pill, combination hormonal patches and rings, injectable progestins, implantable progestins, intrauterine devices (copper or progestin), and permanent sterilization. These methods have varying efficacy, often related to patient compliance or tolerance of side effects.

Techniques for the interruption of tubal patency for female sterilisation

BACKGROUND

This is an update of a review that was first published in 2002. Female sterilisation is the most popular contraceptive method worldwide. Several techniques exist for interrupting the patency of fallopian tubes, including cutting and tying the tubes, damaging the tube using electric current, applying clips or silicone rubber rings, and blocking the tubes with chemicals or tubal inserts.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the different tubal occlusion techniques in terms of major and minor morbidity, failure rates (pregnancies), technical failures and difficulties, and women's and surgeons' satisfaction.

SEARCH METHODS

For the original review published in 2002 we searched MEDLINE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). For this 2015 update, we searched POPLINE, LILACS, PubMed and CENTRAL on 23 July 2015. We used the related articles feature of PubMed and searched reference lists of newly identified trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different techniques for tubal sterilisation, irrespective of the route of fallopian tube access or the method of anaesthesia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

For the original review, two review authors independently selected studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. For this update, data extraction was performed by one author (TL) and checked by another (RK). We grouped trials according to the type of comparison evaluated. Results are reported as odds ratios (OR) or mean differences (MD) using fixed-effect methods, unless heterogeneity was high, in which case we used random-effects methods.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 19 RCTs involving 13,209 women. Most studies concerned interval sterilisation; three RCTs involving 1632 women, concerned postpartum sterilisation. Comparisons included tubal rings versus clips (six RCTs, 4232 women); partial salpingectomy versus electrocoagulation (three RCTs, 2019 women); tubal rings versus electrocoagulation (two RCTs, 599 women); partial salpingectomy versus clips (four RCTs, 3627 women); clips versus electrocoagulation (two RCTs, 206 women); and Hulka versus Filshie clips (two RCTs, 2326 women). RCTs of clips versus electrocoagulation contributed no data to the review.One year after sterilisation, failure rates were low (< 5/1000) for all methods.There were no deaths reported with any method, and major morbidity related to the occlusion technique was rare.Minor morbidity was higher with the tubal ring than the clip (Peto OR 2.15, 95% CI 1.22 to 3.78; participants = 842; studies = 2; I² = 0%; high-quality evidence), as were technical failures (Peto OR 3.93, 95% CI 2.43 to 6.35; participants = 3476; studies = 3; I² = 0%; high-quality evidence).Major morbidity was significantly higher with the modified Pomeroy technique than electrocoagulation (Peto OR 2.87, 95% CI 1.13 to 7.25; participants = 1905; studies = 2; I² = 0%; low-quality evidence), as was postoperative pain (Peto OR 3.85, 95% CI 2.91 to 5.10; participants = 1905; studies = 2; I² = 0%; moderate-quality evidence).When tubal rings were compared with electrocoagulation, postoperative pain was reported significantly more frequently for tubal rings (OR 3.40, 95% CI 1.17 to 9.84; participants = 596; studies = 2; I² = 87%; low-quality evidence).When partial salpingectomy was compared with clips, there were no major morbidity events in either group (participants = 2198, studies = 1). The frequency of minor morbidity was low and not significantly different between groups (Peto OR 7.39, 95% CI 0.46 to 119.01; participants = 193; studies = 1, low-quality evidence). Although technical failure occurred more frequently with clips (Peto OR 0.18, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.40; participants = 2198; studies = 1; moderate-quality evidence); operative time was shorter with clips than partial salpingectomy (MD 4.26 minutes, 95% CI 3.65 to 4.86; participants = 2223; studies = 2; I² = 0%; high-quality evidence).We found little evidence concerning women's or surgeon's satisfaction. No RCTs compared tubal microinserts (hysteroscopic sterilisation) or chemical inserts (quinacrine) to other methods.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Tubal sterilisation by partial salpingectomy, electrocoagulation, or using clips or rings, is a safe and effective method of contraception. Failure rates at 12 months post-sterilisation and major morbidity are rare outcomes with any of these techniques. Minor complications and technical failures appear to be more common with rings than clips. Electrocoagulation may be associated with less postoperative pain than the modified Pomeroy or tubal ring methods. Further research should include RCTs (for effectiveness) and controlled observational studies (for adverse effects) on sterilisation by minimally-invasive methods, i.e. tubal inserts and quinacrine.

Safety and efficacy of hysteroscopic sterilization compared with laparoscopic sterilization: an observational cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the safety and efficacy of hysteroscopic sterilization with the "Essure" device with laparoscopic sterilization in a large, all-inclusive, state cohort.

DESIGN

Population based cohort study.

SETTINGS

Outpatient interventional setting in New York State.

PARTICIPANTS

Women undergoing interval sterilization procedure, including hysteroscopic sterilization with Essure device and laparoscopic surgery, between 2005 and 2013.

MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES

Safety events within 30 days of procedures; unintended pregnancies and reoperations within one year of procedures. Mixed model accounting for hospital clustering was used to compare 30 day and 1 year outcomes, adjusting for patient characteristics and other confounders. Time to reoperation was evaluated using frailty model for time to event analysis.

RESULTS

We identified 8048 patients undergoing hysteroscopic sterilization and 44,278 undergoing laparoscopic sterilization between 2005 and 2013 in New York State. There was a significant increase in the use of hysteroscopic procedures during this period, while use of laparoscopic sterilization decreased. Patients undergoing hysteroscopic sterilization were older than those undergoing laparoscopic sterilization and were more likely to have a history of pelvic inflammatory disease (10.3% v 7.2%, P<0.01), major abdominal surgery (9.4% v 7.9%, P<0.01), and cesarean section (23.2% v 15.4%, P<0.01). At one year after surgery, hysteroscopic sterilization was not associated with a higher risk of unintended pregnancy (odds ratio 0.84 (95% CI 0.63 to 1.12)) but was associated with a substantially increased risk of reoperation (odds ratio 10.16 (7.47 to 13.81)) compared with laparoscopic sterilization.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing hysteroscopic sterilization have a similar risk of unintended pregnancy but a more than 10-fold higher risk of undergoing reoperation compared with patients undergoing laparoscopic sterilization. Benefits and risks of both procedures should be discussed with patients for informed decisions making.

Techniques for the interruption of tubal patency for female sterilisation

BACKGROUND

This is an update of a review that was first published in 2002. Female sterilisation is the most popular contraceptive method worldwide. Several techniques exist for interrupting the patency of fallopian tubes, including cutting and tying the tubes, damaging the tube using electric current, applying clips or silicone rubber rings, and blocking the tubes with chemicals or tubal inserts.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the different tubal occlusion techniques in terms of major and minor morbidity, failure rates (pregnancies), technical failures and difficulties, and women's and surgeons' satisfaction.

SEARCH METHODS

For the original review published in 2002 we searched MEDLINE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). For this 2015 update, we searched POPLINE, LILACS, PubMed and CENTRAL on 23 July 2015. We used the related articles feature of PubMed and searched reference lists of newly identified trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different techniques for tubal sterilisation, irrespective of the route of fallopian tube access or the method of anaesthesia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

For the original review, two review authors independently selected studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. For this update, data extraction was performed by one author (TL) and checked by another (RK). We grouped trials according to the type of comparison evaluated. Results are reported as odds ratios (OR) or mean differences (MD) using fixed-effect methods, unless heterogeneity was high, in which case we used random-effects methods.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 19 RCTs involving 13,209 women. Most studies concerned interval sterilisation; three RCTs involving 1632 women, concerned postpartum sterilisation. Comparisons included tubal rings versus clips (six RCTs, 4232 women); partial salpingectomy versus electrocoagulation (three RCTs, 2019 women); tubal rings versus electrocoagulation (two RCTs, 599 women); partial salpingectomy versus clips (four RCTs, 3827 women); clips versus electrocoagulation (two RCTs, 206 women); and Hulka versus Filshie clips (two RCTs, 2326 women). RCTs of clips versus electrocoagulation contributed no data to the review.One year after sterilisation, failure rates were low (< 5/1000) for all methods.There were no deaths reported with any method, and major morbidity related to the occlusion technique was rare.Minor morbidity was statistically significantly higher with the tubal ring than the clip (Peto OR 2.15, 95% CI 1.22 to 3.78; participants = 842; studies = 2; I² = 0%; high-quality evidence), as were technical failures (Peto OR 3.93, 95% CI 2.43 to 6.35; participants = 3476; studies = 3; I² = 0%; high-quality evidence).Major morbidity was significantly higher with the modified Pomeroy technique than electrocoagulation (Peto OR 2.87, 95% CI 1.13 to 7.25; participants = 1905; studies = 2; I² = 0%; low-quality evidence), as was postoperative pain (Peto OR 3.85, 95% CI 2.91 to 5.10; participants = 1905; studies = 2; I² = 0%; moderate-quality evidence).When tubal rings were compared with electrocoagulation, postoperative pain was reported significantly more frequently for tubal rings (OR 3.40, 95% CI 1.17 to 9.84; participants = 596; studies = 2; I² = 87%; low-quality evidence).When partial salpingectomy was compared with clips, there were no major morbidity events in either group (participants = 2198, studies = 1). The frequency of minor morbidity was low and not significantly different between groups (Peto OR 7.39, 95% CI 0.46 to 119.01; participants = 193; studies = 1, low-quality evidence). Although technical failure occurred more frequently with clips (Peto OR 0.18, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.40; participants = 2198; studies = 1; moderate-quality evidence); operative time was shorter with clips than partial salpingectomy (MD 4.26 minutes, 95% CI 3.65 to 4.86; participants = 2223; studies = 2; I² = 0%; high-quality evidence).We found little evidence concerning women's or surgeon's satisfaction. No RCTs compared tubal microinserts (hysteroscopic sterilisation) or chemical inserts (quinacrine) to other methods.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Tubal sterilisation by partial salpingectomy, electrocoagulation, or using clips or rings, is a safe and effective method of contraception. Failure rates at 12 months post-sterilisation and major morbidity are rare outcomes with any of these techniques. Minor complications and technical failures may be more common with rings than clips. Electrocoagulation may be associated with less postoperative pain than the modified Pomeroy or tubal ring methods. Further research should include RCTs (for effectiveness) and controlled observational studies (for adverse effects) on sterilisation by minimally-invasive methods, i.e. tubal inserts and quinacrine.