Hormone levels before and after tubal sterilization

Hysterectomy With and Without Oophorectomy, Tubal Ligation, and Risk of Cardiovascular Disease in the Nurses' Health Study II

Background: Hysterectomy, oophorectomy, and tubal ligation are common surgical procedures. The literature regarding cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk after these surgeries has focused on oophorectomy with limited research on hysterectomy or tubal ligation. Materials and Methods: Participants in the Nurses' Health Study II (n = 116,429) were followed from 1989 to 2017. Self-reported gynecologic surgery was categorized as follows: no surgery, hysterectomy alone, hysterectomy with unilateral oophorectomy, and hysterectomy with bilateral oophorectomy. We separately investigated tubal ligation alone. The primary outcome was CVD based on medical-record confirmed fatal and nonfatal myocardial infarction, fatal coronary heart disease, or fatal and nonfatal stroke. Our secondary outcome expanded CVD to include coronary revascularization (coronary artery bypass graft surgery, angioplasty, stent placement). Cox proportional hazard models were used to calculate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and were adjusted a priori for confounding factors. We investigated differences by age at surgery (≤50, >50) and menopausal hormone therapy usage. Results: At baseline, participants were on average, 34 years old. During 2,899,787 person-years, we observed 1,864 cases of CVD. Hysterectomy in combination with any oophorectomy was associated with a greater risk of CVD in multivariable-adjusted models (HR hysterectomy with unilateral oophorectomy:1.40 [95% CI: 1.08-1.82]; HR hysterectomy with bilateral oophorectomy:1.27 [1.07-1.51]). Hysterectomy alone, hysterectomy with oophorectomy, and tubal ligation were also associated with an increased risk of combined CVD and coronary revascularization (HR hysterectomy alone: 1.19 [95% CI: 1.02-1.39]; HR hysterectomy with unilateral oophorectomy: 1.29 [1.01-1.64]; HR hysterectomy with bilateral oophorectomy: 1.22 [1.04-1.43]; HR tubal ligation: 1.16 [1.06-1.28]). The association between hysterectomy/oophorectomy and CVD and coronary revascularization risk varied by age at gynecologic surgery, with the strongest association among women who had surgery before age 50 years. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that hysterectomy, alone or in combination with oophorectomy, as well as tubal ligation, may be associated with an increased risk of CVD and coronary revascularization. These findings extend previous research finding that oophorectomy is associated with CVD.

Effects of castration and sterilization on baseline and response levels of cortisol-A case study in male guinea pigs

An uncontrolled reproduction of animals in human hands should be avoided. To meet this goal, animals are widely castrated, i.e., the gonads are completely removed. Since the gonads are the most important source of sex hormones, this is a serious intervention in the entire endocrine system of an organism. Sterilization is a much less invasive procedure. Thus, it could have advantages over castration. Therefore, the overall aim of this study was to analyze the effect of castration vs. sterilization on the release of glucocorticoids, i.e., an important indicator for welfare. Taking domestic guinea pigs as a model system, we studied baseline and response cortisol values (cortisol is the main glucocorticoid in guinea pigs) in castrated, sterilized, sham-operated and intact males and baseline values in their cohoused females. Whereas baseline values of males did not differ between the groups, castrated males showed significantly higher cortisol response levels than intact, sham-operated and sterilized males. Females housed with castrated, sterilized, sham-operated or intact males did not differ in their cortisol concentrations, neither shortly after being placed with the respective male or after being co-housed for several weeks. Overall, the results support the hypothesis that castrated males exhibited a higher cortisol responsiveness during acute challenge which could point to a generalized impaired welfare of castrated males in comparison to intact, sham-operated and sterilized males. Our results provide first evidence for a potential negative impact of castration on the animals' welfare, while at the same time pointing toward sterilization representing a less invasive, promising alternative. Therefore, the results may stimulate future research on this topic to further detect potential welfare-related side effects of castration.

Techniques for the interruption of tubal patency for female sterilisation

BACKGROUND

This is an update of a review that was first published in 2002. Female sterilisation is the most popular contraceptive method worldwide. Several techniques exist for interrupting the patency of fallopian tubes, including cutting and tying the tubes, damaging the tube using electric current, applying clips or silicone rubber rings, and blocking the tubes with chemicals or tubal inserts.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the different tubal occlusion techniques in terms of major and minor morbidity, failure rates (pregnancies), technical failures and difficulties, and women's and surgeons' satisfaction.

SEARCH METHODS

For the original review published in 2002 we searched MEDLINE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). For this 2015 update, we searched POPLINE, LILACS, PubMed and CENTRAL on 23 July 2015. We used the related articles feature of PubMed and searched reference lists of newly identified trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different techniques for tubal sterilisation, irrespective of the route of fallopian tube access or the method of anaesthesia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

For the original review, two review authors independently selected studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. For this update, data extraction was performed by one author (TL) and checked by another (RK). We grouped trials according to the type of comparison evaluated. Results are reported as odds ratios (OR) or mean differences (MD) using fixed-effect methods, unless heterogeneity was high, in which case we used random-effects methods.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 19 RCTs involving 13,209 women. Most studies concerned interval sterilisation; three RCTs involving 1632 women, concerned postpartum sterilisation. Comparisons included tubal rings versus clips (six RCTs, 4232 women); partial salpingectomy versus electrocoagulation (three RCTs, 2019 women); tubal rings versus electrocoagulation (two RCTs, 599 women); partial salpingectomy versus clips (four RCTs, 3627 women); clips versus electrocoagulation (two RCTs, 206 women); and Hulka versus Filshie clips (two RCTs, 2326 women). RCTs of clips versus electrocoagulation contributed no data to the review.One year after sterilisation, failure rates were low (< 5/1000) for all methods.There were no deaths reported with any method, and major morbidity related to the occlusion technique was rare.Minor morbidity was higher with the tubal ring than the clip (Peto OR 2.15, 95% CI 1.22 to 3.78; participants = 842; studies = 2; I² = 0%; high-quality evidence), as were technical failures (Peto OR 3.93, 95% CI 2.43 to 6.35; participants = 3476; studies = 3; I² = 0%; high-quality evidence).Major morbidity was significantly higher with the modified Pomeroy technique than electrocoagulation (Peto OR 2.87, 95% CI 1.13 to 7.25; participants = 1905; studies = 2; I² = 0%; low-quality evidence), as was postoperative pain (Peto OR 3.85, 95% CI 2.91 to 5.10; participants = 1905; studies = 2; I² = 0%; moderate-quality evidence).When tubal rings were compared with electrocoagulation, postoperative pain was reported significantly more frequently for tubal rings (OR 3.40, 95% CI 1.17 to 9.84; participants = 596; studies = 2; I² = 87%; low-quality evidence).When partial salpingectomy was compared with clips, there were no major morbidity events in either group (participants = 2198, studies = 1). The frequency of minor morbidity was low and not significantly different between groups (Peto OR 7.39, 95% CI 0.46 to 119.01; participants = 193; studies = 1, low-quality evidence). Although technical failure occurred more frequently with clips (Peto OR 0.18, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.40; participants = 2198; studies = 1; moderate-quality evidence); operative time was shorter with clips than partial salpingectomy (MD 4.26 minutes, 95% CI 3.65 to 4.86; participants = 2223; studies = 2; I² = 0%; high-quality evidence).We found little evidence concerning women's or surgeon's satisfaction. No RCTs compared tubal microinserts (hysteroscopic sterilisation) or chemical inserts (quinacrine) to other methods.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Tubal sterilisation by partial salpingectomy, electrocoagulation, or using clips or rings, is a safe and effective method of contraception. Failure rates at 12 months post-sterilisation and major morbidity are rare outcomes with any of these techniques. Minor complications and technical failures appear to be more common with rings than clips. Electrocoagulation may be associated with less postoperative pain than the modified Pomeroy or tubal ring methods. Further research should include RCTs (for effectiveness) and controlled observational studies (for adverse effects) on sterilisation by minimally-invasive methods, i.e. tubal inserts and quinacrine.

Techniques for the interruption of tubal patency for female sterilisation

BACKGROUND

This is an update of a review that was first published in 2002. Female sterilisation is the most popular contraceptive method worldwide. Several techniques exist for interrupting the patency of fallopian tubes, including cutting and tying the tubes, damaging the tube using electric current, applying clips or silicone rubber rings, and blocking the tubes with chemicals or tubal inserts.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the different tubal occlusion techniques in terms of major and minor morbidity, failure rates (pregnancies), technical failures and difficulties, and women's and surgeons' satisfaction.

SEARCH METHODS

For the original review published in 2002 we searched MEDLINE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). For this 2015 update, we searched POPLINE, LILACS, PubMed and CENTRAL on 23 July 2015. We used the related articles feature of PubMed and searched reference lists of newly identified trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different techniques for tubal sterilisation, irrespective of the route of fallopian tube access or the method of anaesthesia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

For the original review, two review authors independently selected studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. For this update, data extraction was performed by one author (TL) and checked by another (RK). We grouped trials according to the type of comparison evaluated. Results are reported as odds ratios (OR) or mean differences (MD) using fixed-effect methods, unless heterogeneity was high, in which case we used random-effects methods.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 19 RCTs involving 13,209 women. Most studies concerned interval sterilisation; three RCTs involving 1632 women, concerned postpartum sterilisation. Comparisons included tubal rings versus clips (six RCTs, 4232 women); partial salpingectomy versus electrocoagulation (three RCTs, 2019 women); tubal rings versus electrocoagulation (two RCTs, 599 women); partial salpingectomy versus clips (four RCTs, 3827 women); clips versus electrocoagulation (two RCTs, 206 women); and Hulka versus Filshie clips (two RCTs, 2326 women). RCTs of clips versus electrocoagulation contributed no data to the review.One year after sterilisation, failure rates were low (< 5/1000) for all methods.There were no deaths reported with any method, and major morbidity related to the occlusion technique was rare.Minor morbidity was statistically significantly higher with the tubal ring than the clip (Peto OR 2.15, 95% CI 1.22 to 3.78; participants = 842; studies = 2; I² = 0%; high-quality evidence), as were technical failures (Peto OR 3.93, 95% CI 2.43 to 6.35; participants = 3476; studies = 3; I² = 0%; high-quality evidence).Major morbidity was significantly higher with the modified Pomeroy technique than electrocoagulation (Peto OR 2.87, 95% CI 1.13 to 7.25; participants = 1905; studies = 2; I² = 0%; low-quality evidence), as was postoperative pain (Peto OR 3.85, 95% CI 2.91 to 5.10; participants = 1905; studies = 2; I² = 0%; moderate-quality evidence).When tubal rings were compared with electrocoagulation, postoperative pain was reported significantly more frequently for tubal rings (OR 3.40, 95% CI 1.17 to 9.84; participants = 596; studies = 2; I² = 87%; low-quality evidence).When partial salpingectomy was compared with clips, there were no major morbidity events in either group (participants = 2198, studies = 1). The frequency of minor morbidity was low and not significantly different between groups (Peto OR 7.39, 95% CI 0.46 to 119.01; participants = 193; studies = 1, low-quality evidence). Although technical failure occurred more frequently with clips (Peto OR 0.18, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.40; participants = 2198; studies = 1; moderate-quality evidence); operative time was shorter with clips than partial salpingectomy (MD 4.26 minutes, 95% CI 3.65 to 4.86; participants = 2223; studies = 2; I² = 0%; high-quality evidence).We found little evidence concerning women's or surgeon's satisfaction. No RCTs compared tubal microinserts (hysteroscopic sterilisation) or chemical inserts (quinacrine) to other methods.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Tubal sterilisation by partial salpingectomy, electrocoagulation, or using clips or rings, is a safe and effective method of contraception. Failure rates at 12 months post-sterilisation and major morbidity are rare outcomes with any of these techniques. Minor complications and technical failures may be more common with rings than clips. Electrocoagulation may be associated with less postoperative pain than the modified Pomeroy or tubal ring methods. Further research should include RCTs (for effectiveness) and controlled observational studies (for adverse effects) on sterilisation by minimally-invasive methods, i.e. tubal inserts and quinacrine.

Prooxidant-antioxidant balance and malondialdehyde over time in adult rats after tubal sterilization and vasectomy

OBJECTIVE

Sterilization (tubal sterilization and vasectomy) is a widely applied contraceptive method worldwide. Although most studies have described sterilization as a safe method, there are reports of tubal ligation (TL) and vasectomy complications. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of TL and vasectomy on the serum oxidative stress, specifically prooxidant-antioxidant balance (PAB) and malondialdehyde (MDA) levels, over time.

METHODS

Male and female rats were classified into vasectomy, sham-vasectomy, TL, and sham-TL groups, respectively. The PAB and MDA levels were measured on days 15 and 45 and months 3 and 6 after the intervention. For female rats, blood sampling was performed during the diestrous phase and estradiol and progesterone were also measured.

RESULTS

Serum PAB and MDA increased after TL (p<0.05). Vasectomy increased serum MDA remarkably after 45 days, 3 months, and 6 months (p<0.05). After vasectomy, serum PAB also increased although not significantly. Serum estradiol and progesterone decreased remarkably in the TL group compared to the sham group (p<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Bilateral TL and vasectomy both increase the serum oxidative stress; however the imbalance after TL was very noticeable. As for the TL, the reduction of serum estrogen levels can be involved in this imbalance. Complications followed by TL or vasectomy could be due to increased levels of oxidants. Thus, prescribing antioxidants during and or after surgery may be a solution.

Tubal sterilization during cesarean section or as an elective procedure? Effect on the ovarian reserve

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study is to compare the effects of tubal sterilization on the ovarian reserve by means of hormonal and ultrasonographic evaluation during a cesarean section or when performed as a planned interval procedure.

STUDY DESIGN

Fifty women who had undergone tubal sterilization during a cesarean section (n=24) and by minilaparotomy as an elective procedure (n=26) were included in the study. Tubes were ligated with the Pomeroy technique in both groups. The women who had chosen to use barrier method or intrauterine device for contraception (n=30) constituted the control group. Among the women in the control group, two separate control groups were constituted (control 1 and control 2) who were age matched with the women in each study group. Hormone levels including antimüllerian hormone (AMH) and inhibin B and ultrasonographic evaluations were performed on the third day of the menstrual cycle 1 year after the tubal sterilization procedure.

RESULTS

Mean blood estradiol, follicle stimulating hormone and luteinizing hormone levels on the third day of the cycle postoperative 12 months after the surgical intervention did not show any significant differences in the groups with respect to their age-matched controls. There was no significant difference in terms of mean serum AMH and inhibin B levels between the groups and their age-matched controls. However, significantly higher postoperative levels of mean AMH levels were detected in the tubal sterilization during cesarean section group when compared with the minilaparotomy group, and significantly lower postoperative levels of mean inhibin B were detected in the elective tubal sterilization via minilaparotomy group when compared with the cesarean section group. Statistically significant differences were observed in terms of number of antral follicles and mean ovarian volumes being less in the elective tubal sterilization via minilaparotomy group when compared with age-matched controls.

CONCLUSION

Intraoperative cesarean section tubal sterilization seems to be a practical and safe method, and has less effect on the ovarian reserve when compared with planned tubal sterilization by minilaparotomy.

Techniques for the interruption of tubal patency for female sterilisation

BACKGROUND

Female sterilisation is the most popular contraceptive method worldwide. Several techniques are described in the literature, however only few of them are commonly used and properly evaluated.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the different tubal occlusion techniques in terms of major and minor morbidity, failure rates (pregnancies), technical failures and difficulties, and women's and surgeons' views.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Originally MEDLINE and The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register were searched. For the 2010 update, searches of Popline, Lilacs, Pubmed and The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register were performed. Reference lists of identified trials were searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials comparing different techniques for tubal sterilisation, regardless of the route of Fallopian tube access or the method of anaesthesia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Trials under consideration were evaluated for methodological quality and appropriateness for inclusion. Nine relevant studies were included and the results were stratified in five groups: tubal ring versus clip, modified Pomeroy versus electrocoagulation, tubal ring versus electrocoagulation, modified Pomeroy versus Filshie clip and Hulka versus Filshie clip. Results are reported as odds ratio for dichotomous outcomes and weighted mean differences for continuous outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

Tubal ring versus clip: Minor morbidity was higher in the ring group (Peto OR 2.15; 95% CI 1.22, 3.78). Technical difficulties were found less frequent in the clip group ( Peto OR 3.87; 95% CI 1.90, 7.89). There was no difference in failure rates between the two groups (Peto OR 0.70; 95% CI 0.28, 1.76). Pomeroy versus electrocoagulation: Women undergoing modified Pomeroy technique had higher major morbidity than those with the electrocoagulation technique (Peto OR 2.87; 95% CI 1.13, 7.25). Postoperative pain was more frequent in the Pomeroy group (Peto OR 3.85; 95% CI 2.91, 5.10). Tubal ring versus electrocoagulation: Post operative pain was more frequently reported in the tubal ring group. No pregnancies were reported. Pomeroy versus Filshie clip: In the only trial comparing the two interventions only one pregnancy was reported in the Pomeroy group after follow-up for 24 months. No differences were found when comparing Hulka versus Filshie clip in the only study that compared these two devices.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Electrocoagulation was associated with less morbidity including post-operative pain when compared with the modified Pomeroy and tubal ring methods, despite the risk of burns to the small bowel. The small sample size and the relative short period of follow-up in these studies limited the power to show clinical or statistical differences for rare outcomes such as failure rates. Aspects such as training, costs and maintenance of the equipment may be important factors in deciding which method to choose.

Sterilization decision making among medically at-risk obese pregnant women

In this article, we describe a study using a qualitative, naturalistic grounded theory design to explore sterilization decision making by pregnant obese women. Semistructured interviews of women who intended to undergo sterilization at the time of delivery were conducted in the third trimester of pregnancy (n = 15) and again postpartum (n = 11). The decision for sterilization was based on personal criteria for family composition and the nature of each woman's relationship with her partner. The process of decision making began with developing a personal comfort with cessation of childbearing, followed by social confirmation, informing the provider, and then awaiting the procedure. Sterilization was seen as reversible, despite a desire for "something permanent." Obesity was rarely viewed as related to any part of the decision for or against sterilization, and was rarely discussed by providers. Participants made sterilization decisions in their personal and social contexts, and then shared the decision with their providers, whom they often perceived as challenging that decision.

Use of oral contraceptives, intrauterine devices and tubal sterilization and cancer risk in a large prospective study, from 1996 to 2006

The association of contraceptive methods, including oral contraceptives (OC), intrauterine devices (IUD) and tubal sterilization (TS), with overall and site-specific cancer were prospectively investigated in a cohort of 66,661 Chinese women in Shanghai, 76.7% of whom used contraception. During a median follow-up time of 7.5 years, 2,250 women were diagnosed with cancer. Ever-use of any contraceptive method was not associated with overall cancer risk [adjusted hazard ratio (HR(adj)) = 1.02, 95% CI, 0.92-1.12]. Use of any contraceptive method was associated with increased risk of rectal cancer (HR(adj) = 1.68, 95% CI, 1.08-2.62) and reduced risk of thyroid cancer (HR(adj) = 0.63, 95% CI, 0.38-1.04). Risk of gallbladder cancer increased with ever use of OC (HR(adj) = 2.38, 95% CI, 1.26-4.49). IUD use was associated with a possible reduced risk of thyroid cancer (HR(adj) = 0.64, 95% CI, 0.38-1.07). Longer duration of IUD use decreased risk for breast, thyroid and lung cancers. Ever having a TS was associated with increased uterine body cancer (HR(adj) = 2.50, 95% CI, 1.47-4.25) and decreased risk of stomach cancer (HR(adj) = 0.59, 95% CI, 0.39-0.91). We did not find any contraceptive method to be related to the risk of ovarian cancer but the analyses were based on few events. Although chance findings are a likely explanation for some of the associations found in our study, these findings suggest that various contraceptive methods or reproductive patterns may play a role in the etiology of cancer.

Tubal sterilization, all-cause death, and cancer among women in the United Kingdom: evidence from the Royal College of General Practitioners' Oral Contraception Study

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between tubal sterilization and subsequent all-cause death and the risk of any gynecologic and breast cancer in women in the United Kingdom.

STUDY DESIGN

A cohort study was conducted with 2801 sterilized women and 2801 nonsterilized women who were identified from the UK Royal College of General Practitioners' Oral Contraception Study. Adjusted hazard ratios and 95% CIs were calculated with Cox regression.

RESULTS

Tubal sterilization was not associated with significantly altered risks of subsequent all-cause death or cancer. Tubal sterilization was associated with a nonsignificant reduced risk of subsequent gynecologic (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.52-1.37) and breast cancer (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.67-1.16).

CONCLUSION

The absence of increased long-term death and cancer risk is reassuring, given that many women have chosen this method of contraception.

Techniques for the interruption of tubal patency for female sterilisation

BACKGROUND

Female sterilization is the most popular contraceptive method worldwide. Several techniques are described in the literature, however only few of them are commonly used and properly evaluated.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the different tubal occlusion techniques in terms of major and minor morbidity, failure rates (pregnancies), technical failures and difficulties and women's and surgeons' views.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register has been searched. A search of the reference lists of identified trials was performed. An additional MEDLINE search was done using an Internet search service Pub Med.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomized controlled trials comparing different techniques for tubal sterilization, regardless of the way of entry in the abdominal cavity or the method of anesthesia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Trials under consideration were evaluated for methodological quality and appropriateness for inclusion. Nine relevant studies were included and the results were stratified in five groups: tubal ring versus clip, modified Pomeroy versus electrocoagulation, tubal ring versus electrocoagulation, modified Pomeroy versus Filshie clip and Hulka versus Filshie clip. Results are reported as odds ratio for dichotomous outcomes and weighted mean differences for continuous outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

Tubal ring versus clip: Minor morbidity was higher in the ring group (Peto OR 2.15; 95% CI 1.22, 3.78). Technical difficulties were found less frequent in the clip group ( Peto OR 3.87; 95% CI 1.90, 7.89). There was no difference in failure rates between the two groups (Peto OR 0.70; 95% CI 0.28, 1.76). Pomeroy versus electrocoagulation: Women undergoing modified Pomeroy technique had higher major morbidity than with electrocoagulation technique (Peto OR 2.87; 95% CI 1.13, 7.25). Postoperative pain was more frequent in the Pomeroy group (Peto OR 3.85; 95% CI 2.91, 5.10). Tubal ring versus electrocoagulation: Post operative pain was more frequently reported in the tubal ring group. No pregnancies were reported. Pomeroy versus Filshie clip: In the trial comparing the two interventions only one pregnancy was reported in the Pomeroy group after follow-up for 24 months. No differences were found when comparing Hulka versus Filshie clip in the only study that compared these two devices (Toplis 1988).

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Electrocoagulation was associated with less morbidity when compared with tubal ring and other methods. However the risk of burns to the small bowel might be a serious criticism of the approach. The small sample size and the relative short period of follow-up in these studies limited the power to show clinical or statistical differences for rare outcomes such as failure rates. Aspects such as training, costs and maintenance of the equipment may be important factors in deciding which method to choose.