A comparative study of hysteroscopic sterilization performed in-office versus a hospital operating room

Mark Nichols, James F. Carter, Donald L. Fylstra, Meredith Childers

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

43 Scopus citations

Abstract

Study objective: To compare hysteroscopic female sterilization procedures performed in-office versus a hospital operating room (OR) among newly trained physicians. Design: Multisite hospital operating rooms and physician offices. Patients: Women desiring permanent hysteroscopic sterilization. Intervention: Hysteroscopic female sterilization with the Essure system. Measurements and main results: Procedure time (scope in/scope out time), device placement rates, and incidence of complications and adverse events were compared. There was no significant difference in scope time between the 2 settings. There was no significant difference in placement rates, although the placement rate was somewhat higher in-office (91% vs 88%). There were no complications among any of the procedures, and the incidence of minor adverse events was extremely low in both settings (OR = 2%, in-office = 1%). Conclusion: There is no clear advantage to performing hysteroscopic sterilization in a hospital OR. Hysteroscopic sterilization can be performed safely and efficiently in an office setting.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)447-450
Number of pages4
JournalJournal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology
Volume13
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 2006

Keywords

  • Essure
  • Hysteroscopy
  • In-office
  • Micro-insert
  • Sterilization

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Obstetrics and Gynecology

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'A comparative study of hysteroscopic sterilization performed in-office versus a hospital operating room'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this