STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine whether tubal ligation is a risk factor for future hysterectomy after second-generation endometrial ablation. DESIGN: Retrospective chart review (Canadian Task Force classification II-3). SETTING: Resident-run clinic and private office in a community setting. PATIENTS: Five hundred eighty-seven patients who underwent endometrial ablation. INTERVENTIONS: Patients underwent endometrial ablation using either radiofrequency or thermal balloon. Data collected included age, body mass index, uterine length, and endometrial stripe, as well as smoking status and presence or absence of hypertension and hypothyroidism. Indication for hysterectomy and pathologic findings at hysterectomy were also examined. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: There was no association between tubal ligation and second-generation endometrial ablation resulting in hysterectomy (p = .09). Statistically significant variables included endometrial stripe (p <.001) and smoking (p <.001). There was no statistical significance between the groups insofar as type of ablation, age, body mass index, uterine length, hypertension, or hypothyroidism. Time from endometrial ablation to hysterectomy between groups was not significant. Indication for hysterectomy and pathologic findings after hysterectomy were also not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Tubal ligation is not a statistically significant risk factor for hysterectomy after endometrial ablation. Tubal ligation does not affect the length of time from endometrial ablation to hysterectomy.
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine whether tubal ligation is a risk factor for future hysterectomy after second-generation endometrial ablation. DESIGN: Retrospective chart review (Canadian Task Force classification II-3). SETTING: Resident-run clinic and private office in a community setting. PATIENTS: Five hundred eighty-seven patients who underwent endometrial ablation. INTERVENTIONS:Patients underwent endometrial ablation using either radiofrequency or thermal balloon. Data collected included age, body mass index, uterine length, and endometrial stripe, as well as smoking status and presence or absence of hypertension and hypothyroidism. Indication for hysterectomy and pathologic findings at hysterectomy were also examined. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: There was no association between tubal ligation and second-generation endometrial ablation resulting in hysterectomy (p = .09). Statistically significant variables included endometrial stripe (p <.001) and smoking (p <.001). There was no statistical significance between the groups insofar as type of ablation, age, body mass index, uterine length, hypertension, or hypothyroidism. Time from endometrial ablation to hysterectomy between groups was not significant. Indication for hysterectomy and pathologic findings after hysterectomy were also not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Tubal ligation is not a statistically significant risk factor for hysterectomy after endometrial ablation. Tubal ligation does not affect the length of time from endometrial ablation to hysterectomy.