Abstract The purpose of this study is to compare success rate, patient satisfaction, discomfort, procedure time and in-traoperative adverse events of hysteroscopic (Essure®) versus laparoscopic sterilisation. This study includes a retrospective case–control comparative study of 70 patients who had lapa-roscopic or hysteroscopic sterilisation performed. Systematic chart review for the documentation of preoperative counsel-ling, operative time, intraoperative complications, documen-tation of correct application of Essure® and Filshie® clips and duration of hospital staywas also done. Patient follow-up was arranged and a questionnaire completed including details of postoperative pain, satisfaction of procedure, recovery time and compliance with confirmatory hysterosalpingogram at-tendance and associated pain. The main outcome measures
were pregnancy rate following attempted tubal blockage, re-turn to normal activity and patient satisfaction. Secondary outcomemeasures include patient discomfort, procedure time, device placement, compliance with hysterosalpingogram, postoperative complications and recovery time. There is a statistical difference in favour of Essure® for postoperative pain, operative time, return to work/normal activity and hos-pital staywith no difference in complications or pregnancy. As a conclusion, Essure® is a safe and effective alternative to laparoscopic sterilisation with significantly less procedure-related pain.