Update on permanent contraception options for women

Current Opinion in Obstetrics and Gynecology

Volumn 27, Issue 6, 2015, Pages 465-470

  Patil, Eva ^a   Jensen, Jeffrey T ^a  

^a OREGON HEALTH AND SCIENCE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Permanent contraception; Sterilization; Tubal ligation

Indexed keywords

BILATERAL TOTAL SALPINGECTOMY; CANCER RISK; CAUTERIZATION; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; CONTRACEPTION; COST CONTROL; FEMALE; FEMALE STERILIZATION; HEALTH CARE ACCESS; HEALTH CARE COST; HUMAN; HYSTEROSCOPIC TUBAL OCCLUSION; HYSTEROSCOPY; INSTRUMENT STERILIZATION; INTERVAL LAPAROSCOPIC TUBAL LIGATION; INTERVAL LAPAROSCOPIC TUBAL OCCLUSION; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; LAPAROTOMY; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); NON INVASIVE PROCEDURE; NONSURGICAL PERMANENT CONTRACEPTION; OVARY CANCER; PERMANENT CONTRACEPTION; PHASE 2 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUERPERIUM; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); REVIEW; RISK REDUCTION; SALPINGECTOMY; SURGICAL TRAINING; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW (TOPIC); UTERINE TUBE LIGATION; UTERINE TUBE OCCLUSION; AGE; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; DEVICES; ELECTROCOAGULATION; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; PROCEDURES; REPRODUCTIVE STERILIZATION; SOCIOECONOMICS; UTERINE TUBE STERILIZATION; WOMEN'S HEALTH;

AGE FACTORS; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ELECTROCOAGULATION; FEMALE; HEALTH SERVICES ACCESSIBILITY; HUMANS; LAPAROTOMY; SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS; STERILIZATION, REPRODUCTIVE; STERILIZATION, TUBAL; WOMEN'S HEALTH;

EID: 84947126661     PISSN: 1040872X     EISSN: 1473656X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/GCO.0000000000000213     Document Type: Review

References (56)

1. Peterson HB. Sterilization. Obstet Gynecol 2008; 111:189-203.
2. World Contraceptive Use 2012 [Internet]. Department of Economic and Social Affairs, United Nations Population Division. http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/publications/family/contraceptive-wallchart-2013.shtml. [Accessed 23 June 2015]
3. Chan LM, Westhoff CL. Tubal sterilization trends in the United States. Fertil Steril 2010; 94:1-6.
4. Cullen KA, Hall MJ, Golosinskiy A. Ambulatory surgery in the United States, 2006. Natl Health Stat Rep 2009; 11:1-25.
5. DeFrances CJ, Lucas CA, Buie VC, Golosinskiy A. 2006 National Hospital Discharge Survey. Natl Health Stat Rep 2008; 5:1-20.
6. Jensen JT. Permanent contraception: modern approaches justify a new name. Contraception 2014; 89:493-494.
7. Madari S, Varma R, Gupta J. A comparison of the modified Pomeroy tubal ligation and Filshie clips for immediate postpartum sterilisation: a systematic review. Eur J Contracept Reprod Healthcare 2011; 16:341-349.
8. Lawrie TA, Nardin JM, Kulier R, Boulvain M. Techniques for the interruption of tubal patency for female sterilisation. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews [Internet]. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 2011. http://onlinelibrary.wiley. com/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD003034.pub2/abstract. [Accessed 24 June 2015]
9. Peterson HB, Xia Z, Hughes JM, et al. The risk of pregnancy after tubal sterilization: Findings from the U.S. Collaborative Review of Sterilization. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996; 174:1161-1170.
10. Peterson HB, Xia Z, Hughes JM, et al. The risk of ectopic pregnancy after tubal sterilization. N Engl J Med 1997; 336:762-767.
11. Oligbo N, Revicky V, Udeh R. Pomeroy technique or Filshie clips for post-partum sterilisation? Retrospective study on comparison between Pomeroy procedure and Filshie clips for a tubal occlusion at the time of Caesarean section. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2009; 281:1073-1075.
12. Rodriguez M, Seuc A, Sokal D. Comparative efficacy of postpartum sterilisation with the titanium clip versus partial salpingectomy: a randomised controlled trial. BJOG Int J Obstet Gynaecol 2013; 120:108-112.
13. Rodriguez MI, Edelman AB, Kapp N. Postpartum sterilization with the titanium clip: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol 2011; 118:143-147.
14. Malacova E, Kemp A, Hart R, et al. Long-term risk of ectopic pregnancy varies by method of tubal sterilization: a whole-population study. Fertil Steril 2014; 101:728-734.
15. Huggins GR, Sondheimer SJ. Complications of female sterilization: immediate and delayed. Fertil Steril 1984; 41:337-355.
16. Jamieson DJ, Hillis SD, Duerr A, et al. Complications of interval laparoscopic tubal sterilization: findings from the United States Collaborative Review of Sterilization. Obstet Gynecol 2000; 96:997-1002.
17. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG Practice bulletin no. 133: benefits and risks of sterilization. Obstet Gynecol 2013; 121 (2 Pt 1):392-404.
18. Harrison MS, DiNapoli MN, Westhoff CL Reducing postoperative pain after tubal ligation with rings or clips: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 2014; 124:68-75.
19. Erickson BK, Conner MG, Landen CN Jr. The role of the fallopian tube in the origin of ovarian cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2013; 209:409-414.
20. Jarboe EA, Miron A, Carlson JW, et al. Coexisting intraepithelial serous carcinomas of the endometrium and fallopian tube: frequency and potential significance. Int J Gynecol Pathol 2009; 28:308-315.
21. Vang R, Shih I-M, Kurman RJ. Ovarian low-grade and high-grade serous carcinoma: pathogenesis, clinicopathologic and molecular biologic features, and diagnostic problems. Adv Anat Pathol 2009; 16:267-282.
22. Woodruff JD. The pathogenesis of ovarian neoplasia. Johns Hopkins Med J 1979; 144:117-120.
23. Creinin MD, Zite N. Female tubal sterilization: the time has come to routinely consider removal. Obstet Gynecol 2014; 124:596-599.
24. Backes FJ. Salpingectomy, why not? Am J Obstet Gynecol 2014; 210:385-386.
25. McAlpine JN, Hanley GE, Woo MMM, et al. Opportunistic salpingectomy: uptake, risks, and complications of a regional initiative for ovarian cancer prevention. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2014; 210:471; e1-471.e11.
26. Kwon JS, McAlpine JN, Hanley GE, et al. Costs and benefits of opportunistic salpingectomy as an ovarian cancer prevention strategy. Obstet Gynecol 2015; 125:338-345.
27. Cibula D, Widschwendter M, Zikan M, Dusek L Underlying mechanisms of ovarian cancer risk reduction after tubal ligation. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2011; 90:559-563.
28. Lessard-Anderson CR, Handlogten KS, Molitor RJ, et al. Effect of tubal sterilization technique on risk of serous epithelial ovarian and primary peritoneal carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 2014; 135:423-427.
29. Cibula D, Widschwendter M, Majek O, Dusek L Tubal ligation and the risk of ovarian cancer: review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update 2011; 17:55-67.
30. Sieh W, Salvador S, McGuire V, et al. Tubal ligation and risk of ovarian cancer subtypes: a pooled analysis of case-control studies. Int J Epidemiol 2013; 42:579-589.
31. Committee Opinion No. 620: Salpingectomy for Ovarian Cancer Prevention. Obstet Gynecol 2015; 125:279-281.
32. Shavell VI, Abdallah ME, Shade GH Jr, et al. Trends in sterilization since the introduction of Essure hysteroscopic sterilization. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2009; 16:22-27.
33. Levie M, Weiss G, Kaiser B, et al. Analysis of pain and satisfaction with office-based hysteroscopic sterilization. Fertil Steril 2010; 94:1189-1194.
34. Conceptus. Essure permanent birth control. [Internet]. Essuremd.com. 2014. http://www.essuremd.com/about-essure/clinical-data. [Accessed 22 June 2015]
35. Gariepy AM, Creinin MD, Smith KJ, Xu X. Probability of pregnancy after sterilization: a comparison of hysteroscopic versus laparoscopic sterilization. Contraception 2014; 90:174-181.
36. Kerin JF, Cooper JM, Price T, et al. Hysteroscopic sterilization using a micro-insert device: results of a multicentre Phase II study∗. Hum Reprod 2003; 18:1223-1230.
37. Cleary TP, Tepper NK, Cwiak C, et al. Pregnancies after hysteroscopic sterilization: a systematic review. Contraception 2013; 87:539-548.
38. Munro MG, Nichols JE, Levy B, et al. Hysteroscopic sterilization: 10-year retrospective analysis of worldwide pregnancy reports. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2014; 21:245-251.
39. Adelman MR, Dassel MW, Sharp HT. Management of complications encountered with Essure hysteroscopic sterilization: a systematic review. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2014; 21:733-743.
40. Thurkow AL. AltaSeal hysteroscopic sterilization: the new challenger to Essure? J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2011; 18 (6 Suppl):S38.
41. Thiel J, Rattray D, Cher DJ. Prehysterectomy assessment of immediate tubal occlusion with the third-generation ESSURE Insert (ESS505). J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2014; 21:1055-1060.
42. Xu B, Zhu K, Xu D, Aili A. Management of long-term and reversible hystero-scopic sterilization: a novel device with nickel-titanium shape memory alloy. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2014; 12:61.
43. Eddy CA, Pauerstein CJ. Anatomic and physiologic factors affecting the development of transcervical sterilization techniques. Female transcervical sterilization. Proceedings of an International Workshop on Non-Surgical Methods for Female Tubal Occlusion; 22-24 June 1982; Chicago. Philadelphia: Harper & Row; 1983. pp. 7-23.
44. Benagiano G. Nonsurgical female sterilization with quinacrine: an update. Contraception 2001; 63:239-245.
45. Bhuiyan SN, Begum R. Quinacrine nonsurgical female sterilization in Bangladesh. Contraception 2001; 64:281-286.
46. Hieu DT, Vinh DQ, Tan DN, et al. 31781 cases of nonsurgical female sterilisation with quinacrine pellets in Vietnam. Lancet 1993; 342:213-217.
47. Jensen JT, Hanna C, Yao S, et al. Blockade of tubal patency following transcervical administration of polidocanol foam: initial studies in rhesus macaques. Contraception 2014; 89:540-549.
48. Jensen JT, Hanna C, Yao S, et al. Characterization of tubal occlusion after transcervical polidocanol foam (PF) infusion in baboons. Contraception 2015; 92:96-102.
49. Harrington EK, Gordon D, Osgood-Roach I, et al. Conceptualizing risk and effectiveness: a qualitative study of women's and providers' perceptions of nonsurgical female permanent contraception. Contraception [Internet] 2015; http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010782415000955. [Accessed 22 June 2015]
50. Patil E, Thurmond A. The history and current status of fallopian tube pressures-developing alternate methods for confirmation of tubal occlusion. Contraception [Internet] 2015; http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti-cle/pii/S0010782415000049. [Accessed 21 January 2015]
51. Sharma DC. India's sterilization scandal. Lancet 2014; 384:e68-e69.
52. Rodriguez MI, Gordon-Maclean C. The safety, efficacy and acceptability of task sharing tubal sterilization to midlevel providers: a systematic review. Contraception 2014; 89:504-511.
53. Gordon-Maclean C, Nantayi LK, Quinn H, Ngo TD. Safety and acceptability of tubal ligation procedures performed by trained clinical officers in rural Uganda. Int J Gynecol Obstet 2014; 124:34-37.
54. Borrero S, Zite N, Potter JE, et al. Potential unintended pregnancies averted and cost savings associated with a revised Medicaid sterilization policy. Contraception 2013; 88:691-696.
55. Krashin JW, Edelman AB, Nichols MD, et al. Prohibiting consent: what are the costs of denying permanent contraception concurrent with abortion care? Am J Obstet Gynecol 2014; 211:76.e1-76.e10.
56. Moaddab A, McCullough LB, Chervenak FA, et al. Healthcare justice and its implications for current policy of a mandatory waiting period for elective tubal sterilization. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2015; 212:736-739.