OBJECTIVE: To compare the failure rate (pregnancies) of a Pomeroy procedure and Filshie clips tubal occlusion at the time of Caesarean section. METHOD: This is a retrospective observational study done in a district general hospital in the UK. There were 290 sterilisations performed at the time of Caesarean section over the period of 1994-2007. Studied population included 203 Pomeroy procedures and 87 Filshie clips applications. Follow-up period ranged from 2 to 15 years. A birth register and an operating theatre database were used to identify patients who underwent Caesarean section with a tubal occlusion. These patients' names were checked against the antenatal booking database, the early pregnancy assessment unit database, the operating theatre database in case of ectopic pregnancies, and a termination of pregnancy database to recognise failed sterilisation. RESULTS: There was no failure of tubal occlusion with a Pomeroy procedure (0/203). The failure rate of Filshie clips tubal occlusion was 1.15% (1/87) (p = 0.3). The length of the follow-up period ranged from 2 to 15 years (for Pomeroy procedure, median was 9 years and inter-quartile range (IQR) was 7; for Filshie clip, median was 8 years and IQR was 7). CONCLUSION: Pomeroy technique appears to carry a lower risk of a failed sterilisation than Filshie clips tubal occlusion at the time of Caesarean section. However, Pomeroy procedure needs to be balanced against the speed and simplicity of Filshie clips tubal occlusion.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the failure rate (pregnancies) of a Pomeroy procedure and Filshie clips tubal occlusion at the time of Caesarean section. METHOD: This is a retrospective observational study done in a district general hospital in the UK. There were 290 sterilisations performed at the time of Caesarean section over the period of 1994-2007. Studied population included 203 Pomeroy procedures and 87 Filshie clips applications. Follow-up period ranged from 2 to 15 years. A birth register and an operating theatre database were used to identify patients who underwent Caesarean section with a tubal occlusion. These patients' names were checked against the antenatal booking database, the early pregnancy assessment unit database, the operating theatre database in case of ectopic pregnancies, and a termination of pregnancy database to recognise failed sterilisation. RESULTS: There was no failure of tubal occlusion with a Pomeroy procedure (0/203). The failure rate of Filshie clips tubal occlusion was 1.15% (1/87) (p = 0.3). The length of the follow-up period ranged from 2 to 15 years (for Pomeroy procedure, median was 9 years and inter-quartile range (IQR) was 7; for Filshie clip, median was 8 years and IQR was 7). CONCLUSION: Pomeroy technique appears to carry a lower risk of a failed sterilisation than Filshie clips tubal occlusion at the time of Caesarean section. However, Pomeroy procedure needs to be balanced against the speed and simplicity of Filshie clips tubal occlusion.