Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Gynecological Surgery 1/2017

Open Access 01-12-2017 | Original Article

Essure® present controversies and 5 years’ learned lessons: a retrospective study with short- and long-term follow-up

Authors: Sara Câmara, Filipa de Castro Coelho, Cláudia Freitas, Lilia Remesso

Published in: Gynecological Surgery | Issue 1/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The risk-benefit of contraception with Essure® is being readdressed due to an increase of reports of adverse effects with this device. Our aim was to proceed to an internal quality evaluation and to identify opportunities for protocol improvement.
We proceeded to a one-center, retrospective consecutive case series of women admitted for Essure® placement, from 1 January 2012 until 31 December 2016 (5 years).

Results

In a total of 274 women, technical difficulties were mainly unilateral, with no acute or short-term severe complications. The procedure was brief (median 3.2 min, IQR 2.5–5.2) and moderately painful (median of 4 in a 0–10 scale; IQR 3–5). At 3 months, the failure rate was 2%, with no pregnancies. Second surgery indication (< 1%) resumed to a case of nickel hypersensitivity. At 1 year, pregnancy rate was 1%. Ninety-eight percent of the patients would recommend the method.

Conclusions

We identified high patient satisfaction and low failure rates, both at short and long term. Investigation about whether some women still have patent tubes at the 3-month follow-up could lead to protocol improvement. It is important that clinicians look for second causes for adverse effects related to Essure® and avoid the erroneous indication for implant removal. Long follow-up allowed for both internal quality evaluation and clarification of misconception; it could possibly also have contributed to patient satisfaction.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Carney PI, Yao J, Lin J, Law A (2017) Comparison of healthcare costs among commercially insured women in the United States who underwent hysteroscopic sterilization versus laparoscopic bilateral tubal ligation sterilization. J Women’s Health (Larchmt) 26(5):483–490. doi:10.1089/jwh.2016.6035 CrossRef Carney PI, Yao J, Lin J, Law A (2017) Comparison of healthcare costs among commercially insured women in the United States who underwent hysteroscopic sterilization versus laparoscopic bilateral tubal ligation sterilization. J Women’s Health (Larchmt) 26(5):483–490. doi:10.​1089/​jwh.​2016.​6035 CrossRef
2.
go back to reference American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists (AAGL). Advancing Minimally Invasive Gynecology Worldwide. AAGL Advisory Statement: Essure Hysteroscopic Sterilization. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2016;23(5):658–59. doi:10.1016/j.jmig.2016.06.005 American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists (AAGL). Advancing Minimally Invasive Gynecology Worldwide. AAGL Advisory Statement: Essure Hysteroscopic Sterilization. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2016;23(5):658–59. doi:10.​1016/​j.​jmig.​2016.​06.​005
3.
go back to reference Walter JR, Ghobadi CW, Hayman E, Xu S (2017) Hysteroscopic sterilization with Essure: summary of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration actions and policy implications for postmarketing surveillance. Obstet Gynecol 129(1):10–19. doi:10.1097/AOG.0000000000001796 CrossRefPubMed Walter JR, Ghobadi CW, Hayman E, Xu S (2017) Hysteroscopic sterilization with Essure: summary of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration actions and policy implications for postmarketing surveillance. Obstet Gynecol 129(1):10–19. doi:10.​1097/​AOG.​0000000000001796​ CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Essure® present controversies and 5 years’ learned lessons: a retrospective study with short- and long-term follow-up
Authors
Sara Câmara
Filipa de Castro Coelho
Cláudia Freitas
Lilia Remesso
Publication date
01-12-2017
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Gynecological Surgery / Issue 1/2017
Print ISSN: 1613-2076
Electronic ISSN: 1613-2084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s10397-017-1023-3

Other articles of this Issue 1/2017

Gynecological Surgery 1/2017 Go to the issue