RESEARCH OPEN ACCESS Safety and efficacy of hysteroscopic sterilization compared BMJ: first published as 10.1136/bmj.h5162 on 13 October 2015. Downloaded from with laparoscopic sterilization: an observational cohort study Jialin Mao,1 Samantha Pfeifer,2 Peter Schlegel,3 Art Sedrakyan1 1Department of Health Policy ABSTRACT higher risk of unintended pregnancy (odds ratio 0.84 and Research, Weill Medical OBJECTIVE (95% CI 0.63 to 1.12)) but was associated with a College of Cornell University, To compare the safety and efficacy of hysteroscopic substantially increased risk of reoperation (odds ratio New York, NY 10065, USA sterilization with the “Essure” device with laparoscopic 10.16 (7.47 to 13.81)) compared with laparoscopic 2Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Weill Medical sterilization in a large, all-inclusive, state cohort. sterilization. College of Cornell University, DESIGN CONCLUSIONS New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA Population based cohort study. Patients undergoing hysteroscopic sterilization have a 3Department of Urology, Weill SETTINGS similar risk of unintended pregnancy but a more than Medical College of Cornell Outpatient interventional setting in New York State. 10-fold higher risk of undergoing reoperation University, New York- compared with patients undergoing laparoscopic Presbyterian Hospital, PARTICIPANTS sterilization. Benefits and risks of both procedures New York, NY, USA Women undergoing interval sterilization procedure, should be discussed with patients for informed Correspondence to: including hysteroscopic sterilization with Essure A Sedrakyan decisions making.
[email protected] device and laparoscopic surgery, between 2005 and 2013. Additional material is published Introduction online only. To view please visit MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES Female sterilization is one of the most commonly used the journal online (http://dx.doi.