Placement of an intrauterine device within 48 hours after second-trimester medical abortion: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: International guidelines recommend placement of intrauterine devices immediately after second-trimester medical abortion, but evidence concerning the optimal time for intrauterine device placement is lacking from clinical trials. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate effectiveness, safety, and acceptability of intrauterine device placement within 48 hours, compared with placement at 2 to 4 weeks after second-trimester medical abortion. We hypothesized that intrauterine device placement within 48 hours would be superior compared with placement at 2 to 4 weeks after the abortion, in terms of the proportion of intrauterine device use after 6 months, with maintained safety and acceptability. STUDY DESIGN: In this open-label, randomized, controlled, superiority trial, we recruited participants at 8 abortion clinics in Sweden. Eligible participants were aged ≥18 years, requesting medical abortion with gestation ≥85 days, and opting for use of a postabortion intrauterine device. Participants were randomized (1:1) to intrauterine device placement either within 48 hours of complete abortion (intervention) or after 2 to 4 weeks (control). Our primary outcome was self-reported use of an intrauterine device after 6 months. Secondary outcomes included expulsion rates, pain at placement, adverse events and complications, acceptability, and subsequent pregnancies and abortions. Differences in nonnormal continuous variables were analyzed with the Mann-Whitney U test, and differences in dichotomous variables with the chi-square or Fisher exact tests. A P value <.05 was considered statistically significant. Group differences are presented by modified intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses. RESULTS: Between January 2019 and June 2022, we enrolled 179 participants, of whom 90 were assigned to the intervention and 89 to the control arm. Enrollment was prematurely stopped after an interim analysis exceeded a predefined intrauterine device expulsion rate of 20%. According to modified intention-to-treat analysis, use of intrauterine device after 6 months was 50.7% (34/67) in the intervention group vs 71.6% (48/67) in the control group (proportion difference, 20.9%; 95% confidence interval, 4.4%-35.9%; P=.02). The intrauterine device expulsion rate was 30.1% (22/73) in the intervention group vs 2.9% (2/70; P<.001) in the control group. Other adverse events were rare and patient acceptability was high in both groups. CONCLUSION: Intrauterine device placement within 48 hours after second-trimester medical abortion was nonsuperior in terms of the proportion of intrauterine device use after 6 months when compared with placement after 2 to 4 weeks. Placement within 48 hours after second-trimester abortion can be used in selected individuals after counseling on expulsion risk.

Epidemiological profile and effectiveness of immediate postpartum contraception in Brazilian women.

Purpose: To determine the epidemiological profile of women who inserted copper intrauterine device (Cu-IUD), subdermal etonogestrel implant (ENG), tubal ligation (TL), depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA) or did not choose a contraceptive method (NCM) in the immediate postpartum period and compare the contraceptive effectiveness of Cu-IUD and DPMA with non-MAC. Methods: We analyzed the epidemiological profile of women who inserted copper intrauterine device (Cu-IUD), subdermal etonogestrel implant (ENG), tubal ligation (TL), depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA) or did not choose a contraceptive method (NCM) in the immediate postpartum. The data was collected by electronic medical records of postpartum women assisted at the University Hospital of São Bernardo do Campo (HMU-SBC) from January 2016 to December 2020. Also, we compared the contraceptive effectiveness of Cu-IUD and DPMA with non-MAC by identifying women who returned for second delivery during the study period and analyzing the contraceptive method chosen in the first hospitalization. Then the pregnancies interval and the sociodemographic characteristics were analyzed according to contraceptive method type. Results: Data from 20,896 women were collected, of which 8,183 (39%) opted for Cu-IUD, 559 (2.5%) DPMA, and 10,989 (52.5%) chose not to use contraception at the time of hospital discharge. When comparing these groups, women in the DPMA were younger (26.5 ± 7.3, p < 0.05), and NCM showed women with a lower number of pregnancies (2.2 ± 1.3, p < 0.05). Subjects in the TL group (4.6%) had the higher number of pregnancies (3.8 ± 1.2, p < 0.05), and ENG group, the highest number of miscarriages (1.6 ± 1.3, p < 0.05). Of those women who returned pregnant, 5.5% belonged to the DPMA group, 6% to the NCM group, and 2.3% to the Cu-IUD. Conclusions: Women who opted for Cu-IUD insertion were younger, had more pregnancies and vaginal delivery when compared to those who did not choose a method. Of those women who returned, the minority opted for Cu-IUD compared to those that opted for DPMA or no method.

One-year follow up of contraceptive use and pregnancy rates after early medical abortion: Secondary outcomes from a randomized controlled trial of immediate post-abortion placement of intrauterine devices.

INTRODUCTION: Intrauterine devices (IUDs) effectively prevent unwanted pregnancies. Little is known about long-term outcomes of women choosing an IUD after early medical abortion. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We present secondary outcome data of continuation rates, factors associated with continuation and discontinuation, choice of IUD type, women's satisfaction with IUD, and IUD expulsions, subsequent pregnancies, and abortions within 1 year post-abortion in a randomized, controlled, multicenter trial on IUD placement within 48 hours compared with placement 2-4 weeks after medical abortion up to 63 days' gestation (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03603145). RESULTS: Of the 240 women studied, 112/120 (93.3%) in the intervention group vs 113/120 (94.2%) in the control group completed the 12-month follow-up. The rate of IUD use at 12 months was 84/112 (75%) in the intervention group vs 75/113 (66.4%) in the control group (P = 0.19). Attendance at the IUD placement visit was the only predictor of long-term IUD use (relative risk [RR] = 5.7, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.03-16.0; P = 0.001). The main reason for choosing an IUD was high contraceptive effectiveness. The most common reasons for IUD discontinuation were bleeding problems and abdominal pain. IUD expulsion was rare and did not differ between groups. Satisfaction among IUD users at 1 year was high (>94%) and the majority of all participants would recommend IUD to a friend (65.8%). Use of no contraception and experience of unprotected intercourse were less common in the intervention group (11/112 [9.8%] vs 25/113 [22.1%], P = 0.02 and 17/112 [15.2%] vs 32/113 [28.3%], P = 0.02, respectively). There was no difference in the rate of subsequent pregnancies and abortions (pregnancies 14/112, 12.5% in the intervention group vs 8/113, 7.1% in the control group, P = 0.19; abortions 5/112, 4.5% vs 3/113, 2.7%, P = 0.5). CONCLUSIONS: IUD placement after medical abortion led to high continuation and satisfaction rates with no difference between groups. We found no difference in IUD expulsions after immediate compared with later placement. Unprotected intercourse was significantly less common in the immediate group. In clinical practice, immediate placement of IUDs available free of charge at the abortion clinic is likely to increase attendance to the placement visit and continued use of IUDs after abortion.

Placement of an intrauterine device within 48 hours after early medical abortion-a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Intrauterine devices are safe, well-tolerated, and known to reduce the risk of unwanted pregnancies. At medical abortion, intrauterine devices are placed at a follow-up visit. Patients who miss this visit risk being left without contraception. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate if placement of an intrauterine device within 48 hours of completed medical abortion at up to 63 days' gestation leads to higher user rates at 6 months after the abortion compared with placement at 2 to 4 weeks after abortion. Furthermore, we aimed to compare continued use of intrauterine devices, safety, and patient satisfaction between groups. STUDY DESIGN: We performed an open-label, randomized, controlled, multicenter, superiority trial (phase 3). A total of 240 patients requesting medical abortion at up to 63 days' gestation and opting for an intrauterine device were allocated to placement within 48 hours of complete medical abortion (intervention group) or at 2 to 4 weeks after abortion (control group). We defined the abortion as complete after bleeding with clots and cessation of heavy bleeding following the use of misoprostol. Patients answered questionnaires at 3, 6, and 12 months. The primary outcome was use of intrauterine device at 6 months postabortion. Secondary outcomes included expulsion rate, pain at placement, adverse events and complications from the abortion, acceptability, and pregnancies and their outcomes. Differences in nonparametric continuous variables were analyzed with the Mann-Whitney U test and differences in dichotomous variables with the chi square or Fisher exact tests. A P value of <.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: In the intervention group, 91 of 111 (82%) participants used an intrauterine device at 6 months after the abortion vs 87 of 112 (77.7%) in the control group, with a difference in proportion of 4.3% (95% confidence interval, -0.062 to 0.148; P=.51). Attendance rate and rate of successful intrauterine device placement were similar between the groups. Patients in the intervention group had lower pain scores at placement of the intrauterine device (mean pain score [visual analogue scale], 32.3; standard deviation, 29) compared with the control group (mean pain score [visual analogue scale], 43.4; standard deviation, 27.9; P=.002). Patients preferred their allocated time of placement significantly more often in the intervention group (83/111, 74.8%) than in the control group (70/114, 61.4%; P=.03). Use of ultrasound at intrauterine device placement (because of doubts concerning complete abortion) was more common in the intervention group (43/108, 39.8%) than in the control group (15/101, 14.9%; P<.001), and in one patient in the control group a retained gestational sac was found. Three patients in the intervention group and 2 in the control group had a vacuum aspiration. No difference was found in intrauterine device expulsion rates between the groups. Expulsion during the first 6 months after abortion was experienced by 9 of 97 (9.3%) patients in the intervention group and 4 of 89 (4.5%; P=.25) in the control group. There were no perforations or infections requiring antibiotic treatment. CONCLUSION: Placement of an intrauterine device within 48 hours after medical abortion at ≤63 days' gestation does not lead to higher user rates at 6 months after the abortion compared with intrauterine device placement at 2 to 4 weeks after abortion. When compared with placement at a follow-up visit after 2 to 4 weeks, intrauterine device placement within 48 hours after early medical abortion seems safe, is preferred by patients, and is associated with lower pain scores.

Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice of Brazilian Physicians about Immediate Postpartum and Postabortion Intrauterine Device Insertion / Conhecimento, atitude e prática de médicos brasileiros sobre inserção de dispositivo intrauterino no pós-parto e pós-aborto imediatos

Abstract Objective To assess the knowledge, attitude, and practice of Brazilian physicians about immediate postpartum and postabortion intrauterine device insertion. Methods Cross-sectional online survey involving physicians on duty in public Brazilian hospitals. Participants answered an anonymous questionnaire with close-ended questions to assess their knowledge, attitude, and experience on the immediate postpartum and postabortion insertion of copper intrauterine devices. Results One hundred twenty-seven physicians working in 23 hospitals in the 5 geographic regions of Brazil completed the questionnaire. Most were female (68.5%) and worked in teaching hospitals (95.3%). The mean (standard deviation) knowledge score (0-10 scale) was 5.3 (1.3); only 27.6% of the participants had overall scores ≥7.0. Most physicians (73.2%) would insert a postpartum intrauterine device in themselves/family members. About 42% of respondents stated that they had not received any training on postpartum or postabortion intrauterine device insertion. In the past 12 months, 19.7%, 22.8%, and 53.5% of respondents stated they had not inserted any intrauterine device during a cesarean section, immediately after a vaginal delivery, or after an abortion, respectively. Conclusion Most study participants have a positive attitude toward the insertion of intrauterine devices in the immediate postpartum period, but they have limited knowledge about the use of this contraceptive method. A large percentage of respondents did not have previous training on postpartum and postabortion intrauterine device insertion and had not performed any such insertions in the last 12 months. Strategies are needed to improve the knowledge, training, and experience of Brazilian physicians on immediate postpartum and postabortion intrauterine device insertion.

Resumo Objetivo Avaliar o conhecimento, atitude e prática de médicos brasileiros sobre a inserção de dispositivos intrauterinos no pós-parto e pós-aborto imediatos. Métodos Estudo transversal com inquérito online envolvendo médicos plantonistas de hospitais públicos brasileiros. Os participantes responderam a um questionário anônimo com perguntas fechadas para avaliar seu conhecimento, atitude e experiência sobre a inserção de dispositivos intrauterinos de cobre no pós-parto e pós-aborto imediatos. Resultados Cento e vinte sete médicos de 23 hospitais localizados nas 5 regiões do Brasil preencheram o questionário. A maioria era do sexo feminino (68,5%) e trabalhava em hospitais de ensino (95,3%). O escore médio (desvio padrão) de conhecimento (escala 0-10) foi 5,3 (1,3); apenas 27,6% tiveram escore ≥7,0. A maioria (73,2%) faria inserção de dispositivo intrauterino no pós-parto imediato em si mesma/familiares. Cerca de 42% dos participantes declararam não ter recebido nenhum treinamento sobre inserção de dispositivos intrauterinos no pós-parto ou pós-aborto imediatos. Nos últimos 12 meses, 19,7%, 22,8% e 53,5% declararam não ter inserido nenhum dispositivo intrauterino durante uma cesárea, após um parto vaginal ou um aborto, respectivamente. Conclusão A maioria dos participantes tem uma atitude positiva em relação à inserção de dispositivos intrauterinos no pós-parto imediato, porém tem um conhecimento limitado sobre esse método. Uma grande porcentagem dos respondentes não teve treinamento sobre inserção de dispositivos intrauterinos no pós-parto ou pós-aborto imediatos e não fez nenhuma inserção desse tipo nos últimos 12 meses. São necessárias estratégias para melhorar o conhecimento, o treinamento e a experiência dos médicos brasileiros sobre a inserção de dispositivos intrauterinos no pós-parto e pós-aborto imediatos.

Free-of-charge long-acting reversible contraception: two-year discontinuation, its risk factors, and reasons.

BACKGROUND: Since 2013, the residents of the city of Vantaa, Finland, have been offered their first long-acting reversible contraceptive method (levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system, implant, and copper intrauterine device) free of charge. OBJECTIVE: The primary aim of this study was to assess the 2-year cumulative discontinuation rates of long-acting reversible contraceptive methods when provided free of charge for first-time users in a real-world setting. Additional aims were to describe factors associated with discontinuation and to evaluate the reasons for discontinuation. STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective register-based cohort study of 2026 nonsterilized women aged 15 to 44 years, who initiated a free-of-charge long-acting contraceptive method in 2013-2014 in the city of Vantaa. Removals within 2 years after method initiation and reasons for discontinuation were obtained from electronic health records and from national registers. We calculated the 2-year cumulative incidence rates of discontinuation with 95% confidence intervals for each method. Furthermore, we assessed crude and adjusted incidence rate ratios of discontinuation with 95% confidence interval by Poisson regression models comparing implants and copper intrauterine device with levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine systems. RESULTS: During the 2 -year follow-up, 514 women discontinued, yielding a cumulative discontinuation rate of 28.3 per 100 women-years (95% confidence interval, 26.2-30.4). Among the 1199 women who initiated the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system, the cumulative discontinuation rate was 24.2 per 100 women-years (95% confidence interval, 21.7-26.9); among the 642 implant users, 33.3 per 100 women-years (95% confidence interval, 29.5-37.4); and among the 185 copper intrauterine device users, 37.8 per 100 women-years (95% confidence interval, 31.0-45.7). Compared with women aged 30 to 44 years, women aged 15 to 19 years (adjusted incidence rate ratio, 1.58; 95% confidence interval, 1.17-2.14) and 20 to 29 years (adjusted incidence rate ratio, 1.35; 95% confidence interval, 1.11-1.63) were more likely to discontinue. We observed a higher discontinuation rate in women who had given birth within the previous year (adjusted incidence rate ratio, 1.36; 95% confidence interval, 1.13-1.65), spoke a native language other than Finnish or Swedish (adjusted incidence rate ratio, 1.31; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-1.63), and had a history of a sexually transmitted infection (adjusted incidence rate ratio, 1.62; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-2.46). No association was found in marital status, overall parity, history of induced abortion, socioeconomic status, education level, or smoking status. The most common reason for discontinuation was bleeding disturbances, reported by 21% of women who discontinued the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system, by 71% who discontinued the implant, and by 41% who discontinued the copper intrauterine device. One in 4 women who discontinued the copper intrauterine device reported heavy menstrual bleeding, whereas only 1% who discontinued the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system and none who discontinued implants reported this reason. Abdominal pain was the reported reason for discontinuation in 20% of both intrauterine device users and in only 2% who discontinued implants. CONCLUSION: At 2 years, the use of implants and copper intrauterine devices was more likely to be discontinued than that of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system. Women younger than 30 years and those who gave birth in the preceding year, spoke a native language other than Finnish or Swedish, or had a history of sexually transmitted infections were more likely to discontinue. The levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system was least likely to be removed owing to bleeding disturbances.

[Effects of LNG-IUS on sexual function and sexual quality in women of childbearing age].

Objective: To investigate the effects of levonorgestrel releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) on sexual function and sexual quality in women of childbearing age. Methods: A total of 203 healthy women who were using IUD for long-term contraception were enrolled in the study. Among them, 130 were placed LNG-IUS as the study group and 73 were placed the copper intrauterine devices (Cu-IUDs) as the control group. The two groups were further divided into three subgroups by age. The basic information and questionnaires were adopted before and 2 years after using IUDs, including age, the time of using IUD, side-effects after using IUD, frequency and satisfaction of sex after using IUD. The Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) was evaluated on 2 years after. Results: In the 30-39 age subgroup, the frequency of sex was significantly decreased after using LNG-IUS (P<0.05). Rests of the subgroup shows no significantly different in the frequency of sex (P>0.05). The sexual satisfaction in all subgroups also shows no significantly different before and after using IUDs (P>0.05). There was no significant difference in the individual score and total scores of FSFI between the study group and control group (P>0.05). Conclusion: The LNG-IUS has no adverse effects on female sexual function and sexual quality in the reproductive age.

Use of Intrauterine Devices and Risk of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Acquisition Among Insured Women in the United States.

Concerns have been raised about progestin-containing contraceptives and the risk of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) acquisition. Based on health insurance data from women in the United States with intrauterine device (IUD) insertions during 2011-2018, there was no increased risk of incident HIV diagnosis for levonorgestrel-releasing IUDs versus copper IUDs.

Lack of Association between Cu T-380A Intrauterine Device and Secondary Infertility in Iran.

BACKGROUND: The appropriate choice of a contraceptive method has been a major issue in reproductive health research. Cu T intrauterine device (Cu T IUD) has been introduced as one of the most effective contraceptive methods in the world, however, the relationship between prior use of Cu T IUD and secondary infertility has not been evaluated in Iran. To examine the association of Cu T-380A IUD and secondary infertility in Iran. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted from December 2010 to September 2011 in the Research and Clinical Center for Infertility, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran. A total of 750 married women (15-49 years old) with at least one parity, whom were referred to four educational healthcare centers of Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, were selected as participants. They were divided into two groups (case and control) based on previous history of using Cu T-380A IUD. Data were gathered using a standard reliable questionnaire along with a face-to-face interview and were analyzed with descriptive and analytical (χ²) tests. RESULTS: Mean period of Cu T-380A IUD usage in the case group was 57.46 ± 47.74 months and mean time length from Cu T-380A IUD removal to pregnancy was 14.87 ± 5.18 months in this group. We observed no relationship between the use of Cu T-380A IUD and frequency of secondary infertility (3.5% in the case group versus 2.7% in the control group, P=0.52). CONCLUSION: Given the relatively large sample size studied here, it is unlikely that Cu T-380A IUD results in secondary infertility and may be used by Iranian women as a safe contraceptive method.

Resolución laparoscópica de translocación abdominal de dispositivo intrauterino: Reporte de un caso / Laparoscopic removal of an intra-abdominal translocated intrauterine device: Case report

A partir de que Richter R, en 1909, realizó la primera publicación sobre el uso de dispositivos intrauterinos con fines anticonceptivos, la forma, los materiales, las indicaciones, así como las contraindicaciones han evolucionado hasta convertirse en el método de planificación familiar más usado en el mundo. El riesgo de perforación durante la inserción es bajo; sin embargo, ha sido referida. En la literatura se ha descrito el uso de la laparoscopia para la extracción de dispositivos intrauterinos migrados a cavidad abdominal. En la presente publicación se reporta el caso clínico de una mujer de 29 años de edad, con antecedente de colocación de dispositivo intrauterino, dos años previos, por vía vaginal sin complicación aparente; comenta sólo dolor de cólico posterior a la colocación que va cediendo a analgésicos vía oral no especificados, sin sintomatología hasta la fecha. Acude a revisión y realización de citología cervical donde no se encuentran hilos guía del dispositivo intrauterino. Mediante radiografía simple de abdomen y bajo fluoroscopia se determina la localización intraabdominal del testigo radiopaco del dispositivo, es valorada por el Servicio de Cirugía General y se determina a realizar la extracción del mismo por vía laparoscópica sin complicaciones; se encontró el dispositivo con adherencias a omento mayor, sin afección aparente de órganos intraabdominales. La Organización Mundial de la Salud recomienda la extracción inmediata de los dispositivos intrauterinos que han migrado. La migración del dispositivo intrauterino a la cavidad abdominal es una complicación poco frecuente, y la presentación como hallazgo en pacientes asintomáticas es aún menos frecuente; en una revisión sistemática de la literatura, Richdeep S y cols. valoraron 49 artículos en los que encontraron 179 casos de manejo laparoscópico, reportando al omento como el sitio más frecuente de localización (26.7%). La relevancia del presente caso radica en la presentación asintomática dos años posteriores a su inserción, la ruta diagnóstica utilizando radiografías simples y fluoroscopia, así como la extracción sin complicaciones y con excelente resultado, vía laparoscópica.

Since Richter R. in 1909 performed the first publication on the use of intrauterine devices; materials, forms, indications and contraindications of these have evolved to become the method most widely used family planning in the world. Although the risk of perforation during insertion is low, it exists. The literature has described the use of laparoscopy for removal of intrauterine devices migrated to the abdominal cavity. Case report: 29 years old woman who two years before suffers colic pain posterior to application of an intrauterine device with no complications, and diminishes with the use of unspecified analgesics, and stays asymptomatic to date. She attended a review, and underwent to cervical cytology, during the procedure, was impossible to see the strings of the intrauterine device. Plain abdominal radiography and fluoroscopy were done to determine the location of the radiopaque intraabdominal witness. Assessed by the General Surgery Service we determined extraction of the device by laparoscopy and was done without any complication. Findings: strong omentum adhesions to the device, but no apparent damage to other abdominal organs. The World Health Organization recommends the immediate removal of intrauterine devices that have migrated. The migration of the intrauterine devices into the abdominal cavity is a rare complication, and the presentation as an incidental finding in asymptomatic patients is even less common, a systematic review of literature, Richdeep S. et al, evaluated 49 items found 179 cases of laparoscopic management reporting the omentum as the most common site of localization (26.7%). The relevance of this case lies in the asyntomatic presentation two years after insertion, the diagnostic route using radiographs and fluoroscopy, and extraction without complications and with excellent results laparoscopically.