Facts, Views & Vision
in ObGyn

Abstract

Objective: While contraindications to Essure® placement have been provided by the manufacturer, there is no consensus on how best to remove these contraceptive devices. Here, we describe a non-hysterectomy removal of Essure® for a patient with a septate uterus (ESHRE Class IIb uterine malformation).
Clinical case: A 35yr old G4 P2 presented for removal of Essure® implants after three years of gradually increasing pelvic pain, weight gain, headache, dizziness, lower extremity paresthesia, and fatigue which followed hysteroscopic sterilization (HS). Prior to HS, the patient was in good general health. She did not smoke and had never had a miscarriage. HS was performed under general anesthesia in October 2012. HSG obtained three months later, confirmed bilateral tubal occlusion but revealed an abnormal uterine cavity. A repeat HSG in 2015 showed minimal device migration, no contrast dye spill and a deeply bifid uterine cavity. At our center laparoscopic cornual dissection and bilateral partial tubal resection achieved removal of both devices intact and the patient was discharged three hours after surgery. Her postoperative recovery was uneventful.
Conclusion: The presence of a Müllerian anomaly is a relative contraindication to the Essure® procedure. This is the first reported description of successful removal of Essure® coils in the setting of an ESHRE Class IIb uterine anomaly, and underscores the importance of careful patient selection, accurate pre-operative imaging and a conservative technique which renders hysterectomy unnecessary.