EVALUATION STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
MULTICENTER STUDY
RESEARCH SUPPORT, U.S. GOV'T, P.H.S.
Complications of interval laparoscopic tubal sterilization: findings from the United States Collaborative Review of Sterilization.
Obstetrics and Gynecology 2000 December
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the risk of intraoperative or postoperative complications for interval laparoscopic tubal sterilizations.
METHODS: We used a prospective, multicenter cohort study of 9475 women who had interval laparoscopic tubal sterilization to calculate the rates of intraoperative or postoperative complications. The relative safety of various methods was assessed by calculating overall complication rates for each major method of tubal occlusion. Method-related complication rates also were calculated and included only complications attributable to a method of occlusion. We used logistic regression to identify independent predictors of one or more complications.
RESULTS: When we used a more restrictive definition of unintended major surgery, the overall rate of complications went from 1.6 to 0.9 per 100 procedures. There was one life-threatening event and there were no deaths. Complications rates for each of the four major methods of tubal occlusion ranged from 1.17 to 1.95, with no significant differences between them. When complication rates were calculated, the spring clip method had the lowest method-related complication rate (0.47 per 100 procedures), although it was not significantly different from the others. In adjusted analysis, diabetes mellitus (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 4.5; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.3, 8.8), general anesthesia (OR 3.2; CI 1.6, 6.6), previous abdominal or pelvic surgery (OR 2.0; CI 1.4, 2.9), and obesity (OR 1.7; CI 1.2, 2.6) were independent predictors of one or more complications.
CONCLUSION: Interval laparoscopic sterilization generally is a safe procedure; serious morbidity is rare.
METHODS: We used a prospective, multicenter cohort study of 9475 women who had interval laparoscopic tubal sterilization to calculate the rates of intraoperative or postoperative complications. The relative safety of various methods was assessed by calculating overall complication rates for each major method of tubal occlusion. Method-related complication rates also were calculated and included only complications attributable to a method of occlusion. We used logistic regression to identify independent predictors of one or more complications.
RESULTS: When we used a more restrictive definition of unintended major surgery, the overall rate of complications went from 1.6 to 0.9 per 100 procedures. There was one life-threatening event and there were no deaths. Complications rates for each of the four major methods of tubal occlusion ranged from 1.17 to 1.95, with no significant differences between them. When complication rates were calculated, the spring clip method had the lowest method-related complication rate (0.47 per 100 procedures), although it was not significantly different from the others. In adjusted analysis, diabetes mellitus (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 4.5; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.3, 8.8), general anesthesia (OR 3.2; CI 1.6, 6.6), previous abdominal or pelvic surgery (OR 2.0; CI 1.4, 2.9), and obesity (OR 1.7; CI 1.2, 2.6) were independent predictors of one or more complications.
CONCLUSION: Interval laparoscopic sterilization generally is a safe procedure; serious morbidity is rare.
Full text links
Trending Papers
How to improve the efficiency and the safety of real-time ultrasound-guided central venous catheterization in 2023: a narrative review.Annals of Intensive Care 2023 May 26
SGLT2 Inhibitors: A New Therapeutical Strategy to Improve Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Chronic Kidney Diseases.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2023 May 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
Read by QxMD is copyright © 2021 QxMD Software Inc. All rights reserved. By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app