The New England Journal of Medicine
e-mail icon  FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |    Advanced Search
Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe
 
Original Article
PreviousPrevious
Volume 343:1681-1687 December 7, 2000 Number 23
NextNext

The Risk of Menstrual Abnormalities after Tubal Sterilization
Herbert B. Peterson, M.D., Gary Jeng, Ph.D., Suzanne G. Folger, Ph.D., Susan A. Hillis, Ph.D., Polly A. Marchbanks, Ph.D., Lynne S. Wilcox, M.D., for The U.S. Collaborative Review of Sterilization Working Group

 Sign up for free e-toc
 

This Article
-Full Text
- PDF

Commentary
-Editorial
 by Westhoff, C.

Tools and Services
-Add to Personal Archive
-Add to Citation Manager
-Notify a Friend
-E-mail When Cited

More Information
-PubMed Citation
ABSTRACT

Background The existence of a post–tubal-ligation syndrome of menstrual abnormalities has been debated for decades. We used data from the U.S. Collaborative Review of Sterilization to determine whether the likelihood of persistent menstrual abnormalities was greater among women who had undergone tubal sterilization than among women who had not.

Methods A total of 9514 women who underwent tubal sterilization and 573 women whose partners underwent vasectomy were followed in a multicenter, prospective cohort study for up to five years by means of annual telephone interviews. All women were asked the same questions about six characteristics of their menstrual cycles in the presterilization and follow-up interviews. Multiple logistic-regression analysis was used to assess the risk of persistent menstrual changes.

Results The women who had undergone sterilization were no more likely than those who had not undergone the procedure to report persistent changes in intermenstrual bleeding or the length of the menstrual cycle. They were more likely to have decreases in the number of days of bleeding (odds ratio, 2.4; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.1 to 5.2), the amount of bleeding (odds ratio, 1.5; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.1 to 2.0), and menstrual pain (odds ratio, 1.3; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.0 to 1.8) and to have an increase in cycle irregularity (odds ratio, 1.6; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.1 to 2.3). Among women who had had very heavy bleeding at base line, women who had undergone sterilization were more likely than women who had not undergone the procedure to report decreased bleeding (45 percent vs. 33 percent, P=0.03).

Conclusions Women who have undergone tubal sterilization are no more likely than other women to have menstrual abnormalities.


Source Information

From the Division of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta.

Address reprint requests to Dr. Peterson at the Division of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Mailstop K-34, 4770 Buford Hwy., NE, Atlanta, GA 30341-3724.

Full Text of this Article


This article has been cited by other articles:



HOME  |  SUBSCRIBE  |  SEARCH  |  CURRENT ISSUE  |  PAST ISSUES  |  COLLECTIONS  |  PRIVACY  |  TERMS OF USE  |  HELP  |  beta.nejm.org

Comments and questions? Please contact us.

The New England Journal of Medicine is owned, published, and copyrighted © 2010 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.