Essure is an effective method for hysteroscopic sterilization. Reports of adverse effects, the underlying mechanisms of which are unknown, have increased in recent years.
Objective
The aim of the study was to determine whether there is a relationship between adverse events attributed to Essure and nickel sensitization.
Methods
Patients presenting alleged adverse reactions to Essure were referred for nickel patch testing before removal. Data regarding medical history of nickel sensitization and symptoms attributed to Essure were collected. Dimethylglyoxime spot tests were performed on the explanted Essure. There was a follow-up at 3 months to evaluate whether there is improvement of the symptoms after Essure removal.
Conclusions
Nickel sensitization via the classic delayed hypersensitivity pathway did not seem to be responsible for adverse events attributed to Essure. Among systemic symptoms reported, extracutaneous symptoms had the highest prevalence. Systemic contact dermatitis to nickel could not be ruled out in one case.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
HurskainenR, HoviSL, GisslerM, et al.Hysteroscopic tubal sterilization: a systematic review of the Essure system. Fertil Steril, 2010; 94:16–19.
ClarkNV, RademakerD, MushinskiAA, et al.Essure removal for the treatment of device-attributed symptoms: an expanded case series and follow-up survey. J Minim Invasive Gynecol, 2017; 24:971–976.
8.
ThyssenJP, LinnebergA, MenneT, et al.The epidemiology of contact allergy in the general population – prevalence and main findings. Contact Dermatitis, 2007; 57:287–299.
9.
LaneA, TysonA, ThurstonE. Providing re-Essure-ance to the nickel-allergic patient considering hysteroscopic sterilization. J Minim Invasive Gynecol, 2016; 23:126–129.
10.
FregertS. Manual of Contact Dermatitis. Copenhagen: Munskgaard;. 1974.
11.
JakobsenSS, LidénC, SøballeK, et al.Failure of total hip implants: metals and metal release in 52 cases. Contact Dermatitis, 2014; 71:319–325.
12.
DiepgenTL, OfenlochRF, BruzeM, et al.Prevalence of contact allergy in the general population in different European regions. Br J Dermatol, 2016; 174:319–329.
13.
TeixeiraV, CoutinhoI, GonçaloM. Allergic contact dermatitis to metals over a 20-year period in the Centre of Portugal: evaluation of the effects of the European directives [in Portuguese]. Acta Med Port, 2014; 27:295–303.
14.
GargS, ThyssenJP, UterW, et al. Nickel allergy following European Union regulation in Denmark, Germany, Italy and the U.K. Br J Dermatol 2013;169:854–858.
15.
MortzCG, Bindslev-JensenC, AndersenKE. Nickel allergy from adolescence to adulthood in the TOACS cohort. Contact Dermatitis, 2013; 68:348–356.
16.
ZurawinRK, ZurawinJL. Adverse events due to suspected nickel hypersensitivity in patients with essure micro-inserts. J Minim Invasive Gynecol, 2011; 18:475–482.
17.
SiemonsS, VleugelsM, van EijndhovenH. Evaluation of nickel allergic reactions to the Essure micro insert: theoretical risk or daily practice?. J Minim Invasive Gynecol, 2017; 24:140–144.
18.
BouillonK, BertrandM, BaderG, et al.Association of hysteroscopic vs laparoscopic sterilization with procedural, gynecological, and medical outcomes. JAMA, 2018; 319:375–387.
19.
Al-SafiZ, ShavellVI, KatzLE, et al.Nickel hypersensitivity associated with an intratubal microinsert system. Obstet Gynecol, 2011; 117:461–462.
20.
BibasN, LassereJ, PaulC, et al.Nickel-induced systemic contact dermatitis and intra-tubar implants: the baboon syndrome revisited. Dermatitis, 2013; 24:35–36.
21.
GoldthwaiteLM, EdwardsL, TocceK. Early hysteroscopic removal of intratubal microinserts with urologic stone retrieval forceps. Obstet Gynecol, 2014; 124(2 Pt 2suppl 1):441–444.
22.
BaltusT, BrownJ, MahmoudI. Delayed systemic allergic dermatitis following Essure insert: a case report. Case Rep Womens Health, 2018; 20:e00075.
23.
van DrongelenAW, van ElkM, Moltó-PuigmartíC, et al. Analysis of complaints in the Netherlands on Essure® health problems following a non-surgical sterilization procedure for women. RIVM Letter Report. 2016–0061.
24.
PaprottkaKJ, PaprottkaPM, ReiserMF, et al.Comparative study of the corrosion behavior of peripheral stents in an accelerated corrosion model: experimental in vitro study of 28 metallic vascular endoprostheses. Diagn Interv Radiol, 2015; 21:403–409.
25.
SchramSE, WarschawEM, LaumannA. Nickel hypersensitivity: a clinical review and call to action. Int J Dermatol, 2010; 49:115–125.
26.
ThyssenJP, SkareL, LundgrenL, et al.Sensitivity and specificity of the nickel spot (dimethylglyoxime) test. Contact Dermatitis, 2010; 62:279–288.
27.
KiatkumjornT, RattanaratP, SiangprohW, et al.Glutathione and L-cysteine modified silver nanoplates-based colorimetric assay for a simple, fast, sensitive and selective determination of nickel. Talanta, 2014; 128:215–220.
28.
MaassenLW, van GastelDM, HavemanI, et al. Removal of Essure sterilization devices: a retrospective cohort study in the Netherlands. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2018.
29.
JohansenJD, Aalto-KorteK, AgnerT, et al.European Society of Contact Dermatitis guideline for diagnostic patch testing—recommendations on best practice. Contact Dermatitis, 2015; 73:195–221.
