You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Aetiology/Harm
Cohort study
More data needed on hysteroscopic compared with laparoscopic sterilisation
  1. Aileen Gariepy
  1. Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA
  1. Correspondence to : Professor Aileen Gariepy, Yale School of Medicine, Ob/Gyn and Reproductive Sciences, 310 Cedar St, New Haven, CT 06510, USA; aileen.gariepy{at}yale.edu

https://doi.org/10.1136/ebmed-2015-110347

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Commentary on: Mao J, Pfeifer S, Schlegel P, et al. Safety and efficacy of hysteroscopic sterilization compared with laparoscopic sterilization: an observational cohort study. BMJ 2015;351:h5162.

    Context

    Safety and effectiveness of hysteroscopic sterilisation (Essure System) is an important and timely topic. Recent concerns, including 5093 adverse event reports related to Essure made to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database prompted the FDA to reconvene its Obstetrics and Gynecology Devices Panel in September 2015 to evaluate the safety, effectiveness, and need for further postmarketing studies on Essure.1 Benefits of hysteroscopic sterilisation include no skin incision, probable avoidance of abdominal entry and general anaesthesia, and ability to perform the procedure in an office. Mao et al's2 observational cohort study uses an administrative database to compare selected outcomes after hysteroscopic and laparoscopic sterilisation and adds important data to this …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.