| Literature DB >> 21364861 |
Abstract
TWO HYSTEROSCOPIC PERMANENT STERILIZATION PROCEDURES ARE APPROVED FOR USE IN THE UNITED STATES: Essure® Permanent Birth Control System (Conceptus Incorporated, Mountain View, CA) and Adiana® Permanent Contraception (Hologic, Inc., Bedford, MA). This review compares the clinical trial data for these procedures. A notable difference is the resultant clinical pregnancy risk. The clinical trials for the Essure procedure have reported no pregnancies in 643 relying women in the 9 years since initiation of the studies. The clinical trial for the Adiana procedure has reported 12 pregnancies in 570 relying women in nearly 5 years of collected data. Other clinical outcome parameters concerning Essure and Adiana are examined in this review.Entities:
Keywords: Adiana; Essure; Hysteroscopic sterilization; Transcervical sterilization
Year: 2010 PMID: 21364861 PMCID: PMC3046759
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Rev Obstet Gynecol ISSN: 1941-2797