{"id":14896,"date":"2022-06-02T21:48:39","date_gmt":"2022-06-03T02:48:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/naturalwomanhood.org\/?p=14896"},"modified":"2025-01-20T09:26:37","modified_gmt":"2025-01-20T15:26:37","slug":"embarazo-tras-ligadura-de-trompas","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/naturalwomanhood.org\/es\/pregnancy-after-iud-or-tubal-ligation\/","title":{"rendered":"Las probabilidades de quedarse embarazada tras una ligadura de trompas o la colocaci\u00f3n de un DIU pueden ser mayores de lo que crees  "},"content":{"rendered":"\n

If you\u2019ve ever discussed your options for permanent or long-term contraception with your reproductive healthcare provider, you\u2019ve likely heard the oft-cited statistic that pregnancy occurs \u201cless than 1 percent\u201d of the time after female sterilization procedures or intrauterine device (IUD) placement<\/a>. But a recent study from the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), is calling some of those effectiveness stats into question. As it turns out, women\u2019s chances of getting pregnant in the first year after permanent sterilization or IUD placement <\/a>may actually be higher than the often touted \u201cless than 1 percent chance<\/a>\u201d with these contraceptive methods [1].  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The UCSF researchers evaluated pregnancy rates and complications after sterilization and placement of an IUD for more than 83,000 women in California who were enrolled in Medicaid, a public health insurance plan for low-income patients. Researchers recruited participants between 2008 and 2014, following each one for 12 months post-sterilization or IUD placement. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The sterilization procedure evaluated in the study was tubal ligation<\/a>, a surgical procedure in which a woman\u2019s fallopian tubes are cut, sealed, or tied to permanently prevent pregnancy. Also known as \u201cgetting your tubes tied,\u201d this procedure is the most common contraceptive method<\/a> in the United States, particularly among low-income women<\/a>, and three in ten married couples<\/a> are estimated to choose it [2][3]. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Given that an estimated<\/a> one in eight women aged 15 to 44 use IUDs for long-term contraception (with pediatricians currently promoting<\/a> their use for pregnancy prevention amongst teens, in particular) the UCSF researchers also studied typical use failure rates and complication rates following IUD placement [4]. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Typical vs. perfect-use effectiveness rates for IUDs and sterilization<\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The UCSF study results were published earlier this year in the Journal of General Internal Medicine<\/em> and revealed the proportion of women who became pregnant within one year for each method of long-term contraception. This number, known as the typical use failure rate<\/a>, represents how well a contraceptive method prevents pregnancy in the real-world and takes into account inconsistent use and mistakes.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Usually, typical use failure rates are lower than perfect use failure rates (a metric that represents when a contraceptive method is executed perfectly<\/em>\u2014such as never forgetting to take a birth control pill at the same time, every day). The assumption has long been that typical use failure rates for tubal ligation and IUDs\u2014which require little to no cooperation on behalf of the women who receive them\u2014would be equivalent to the perfect use failure rates seen in clinical trials. That\u2019s why the United States Food and Drug Administration states<\/a> that \u201cout of 100 women\u201d who use tubal ligation or IUD placement, \u201cless than 1 may get pregnant.\u201d <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Yet, the UCSF researchers found that among women who had a tubal ligation, 2.64% became pregnant within one year. Similarly, 2.40% of women who had a levonorgestrel IUD and 2.99% of women who had a copper IUD became pregnant within one year.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Pain after tubal ligation and IUD placement is common<\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The study also detailed the complications many of the women experienced with these methods. Women who had a tubal ligation were at particular risk for infection, abdominal injury, and acute hemorrhage, with 3% experiencing an infection, 3% having an abdominal injury, and nearly 1% having acute hemorrhage.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Pelvic inflammatory disease<\/a> (PID), an infection of the reproductive organs, was seen for nearly 2% of women within 3 months after a tubal ligation, but this dropped to less than 1% for the remainder of the year evaluated after surgery. Some women who had IUD placement\u2014less than 1%\u2014developed PID during the year after placement. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

For both tubal ligation and IUD placement, women commonly had menstrual bleeding concerns and pelvic, genitourinary, and\/or abdominal pain. Researchers also noted that younger women were more likely than older women to report pelvic and\/or abdominal pain after any of the procedures. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

To summarize the results, between six months and one year after tubal ligation or IUD placement (complications were not evaluated beyond one year), the following issues were seen: <\/p>\n\n\n\n