Hysteroscopic tubal sterilization

[Office hysteroscopy: a new examination method in gynecological practice]

Hysteroscopy is a widely used endoscopic method, the "gold standard" for the examination of uterine cavity changes. Office hysteroscopy is an intervention that makes the accomplishment of ambulant examination, opposite to the traditional method. Due to the small diameter of the device the anesthesia is unnecessary, because there is no need of the dilatation of the cervix. Indications of the examination are wide-ranging. Besides the abnormal uterine bleeding, it can be used in the examination of infertility, and those intrauterine changes (polyp, submucosus myoma, adhesion), that were diagnosed by other imagining methods that cause infertility complaints. The aim of our present review is recommend the use of this method because it does not need any preparation and it is minimal invasive. The use of traditional method that needs longer preparation, observation, anesthesia and operating theatre, is only suggested in cases of proven pathology.

Transvaginal endoscopic tubal sterilization

BACKGROUND

Tubal sterilization is one of the most widely used options for female contraception. It can be performed by laparotomy, minilaparotomy, colpotomy, laparoscopy, and hysteroscopy. In this paper, we report the use of the transvaginal endoscopic approach to perform tubal ligation.

CASE

The access to the abdomen was obtained by a 1.5-cm colpotomy. The flexible endoscope was introduced into the peritoneal cavity, and carbon dioxide was instilled to get the pneumoperitoneum. Fallopian tubes were identified and electrocauterized with a 40-W coagulation current. Total procedure time was 45 minutes. A single dose of intravenous dypirone was administered for pain. She was discharged 10 hours after the procedure.

CONCLUSION

Transvaginal endoscopic tubal ligation is feasible and can be considered an alternative approach to perform female sterilization.

Retrospective cost analysis comparing Essure hysteroscopic sterilization and laparoscopic bilateral tubal coagulation

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To compare the institutional cost of permanent female sterilization by Essure hysteroscopic sterilization and laparoscopic bilateral coagulation.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study (Canadian Task Force classification II-2).

SETTING

Midwestern academic medical center.

PATIENTS

Women of reproductive age who elected for permanent contraception by the Essure method (n = 43) or by laparoscopic tubal coagulation (n = 44) during the time frame studied.

INTERVENTIONS

Placement of the Essure inserts according to the manufacturer's instructions or laparoscopic tubal sterilization using bipolar forceps according to standard techniques of open or closed laparoscopy.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Cost-center data for the institutional cost of the procedure was abstracted for each patient included in the study. In addition, demographic data and procedural information were obtained and compared for the patient populations. The Essure system of hysteroscopic sterilization had a significantly decreased cost compared with laparoscopic tubal sterilization when both procedures were performed in an operating room setting. The decrease per patient in institutional cost was 180 dollars (p = .038). This included the cost of the confirmatory hysterosalpingogram 3 months after Essure placement and the cost of laparoscopic tubal occlusion by Filshie clip if the Essure micro-inserts could not be placed. The majority of the cost was related to hospital costs as opposed to physician costs. The Essure procedure had higher costs for disposable equipment (p <.0001), but this was offset by higher charges for operating room costs, which included the recovery room (p <.0001) and pharmacy costs (p <.0001) in the patients in the laparoscopy group.

CONCLUSION

In our setting, the Essure hysteroscopic sterilization had significant cost savings compared with laparoscopic tubal sterilization (p = .038). We believe that our data represent the minimum of potential savings using this approach, and future developments will only increase the cost difference found in our study.