Postplacental intrauterine device expulsion by 12 weeks: a prospective cohort study

被引:42
|
作者
Goldthwaite, Lisa M. [1 ]
Sheeder, Jeanelle [1 ]
Hyer, Jennifer [2 ]
Tocce, Kristina [1 ]
Teal, Stephanie B. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Colorado, Sch Med, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Div Family Planning, Aurora, CO 80045 USA
[2] Denver Hlth Med Ctr, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Denver, CO USA
关键词
intrauterine device; postpartum; CONTRACEPTIVE-DEVICES; CLINICAL-OUTCOMES; POSTPARTUM PERIOD; IUD INSERTION; EXPERIENCE; EFFICACY;
D O I
10.1016/j.ajog.2017.08.001
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
BACKGROUND: An intrauterine device placed immediately following a delivery can serve as an effective and safe contraceptive strategy in the postpartum period. There is limited evidence that the levonorgestrel intrauterine system may have a higher rate of expulsion compared to the copper intrauterine device; however, rates of expulsion for these 2 intrauterine device types have not been compared directly. OBJECTIVE: We sought to compare expulsion rates by 12 weeks' postpartum for the levonorgestrel intrauterine system and copper intrauterine device. STUDY DESIGN: We enrolled women who received postplacental intrauterine devices at 2 urban hospitals. Eligible women were >= 18 years old, English-or Spanish-speaking, with singleton vaginal delivery at >= 35 weeks' gestation. Intrauterine devices were inserted within 10 minutes of placental delivery by trained providers using ring forceps or the operator's hand. Intrauterine device location was evaluated via abdominal ultrasound at 24-48 hours' postpartum, and via transvaginal ultrasound 6 and 12 weeks later, categorizing position of the intrauterine device at the fundus, below the fundus but above the internal os, any part of the intrauterine device below the internal os (partial expulsion), or no intrauterine device visualized. Outcomes included intrauterine device expulsion and method continuation. We used multivariable logistic regression to identify factors associated with expulsion. RESULTS: We enrolled 123 women ages 18-40 years. Of these, 68 (55%) initiated levonorgestrel intrauterine system and 55 (45%) initiated copper intrauterine device. Groups were similar except more copper intrauterine device users were Hispanic (66% vs 38%) and fewer were primiparous (16% vs 31%). Among the 96 (78%) with 12-week follow-up, expulsion was higher for levonorgestrel intrauterine system users (21/55 or 38%) than for copper intrauterine device users (8/41 or 20%) (odds ratio, 2.55; 95% confidence interval, 0.99-6.55; P=.05). At 24 hours' postpartum, there was no significant difference in median distance from the intrauterine device to the fundus between intrauterine device types or between those who did or did not experience expulsion. Of expulsions, 86% occurred <= 6 weeks' postpartum. All complete expulsions were clinically identified, but of the partial expulsions, only 4/10 (40%) were clinically suspected prior to ultrasound. The only independent predictor of expulsion was intrauterine device type. Including reinsertions, intrauterine device use at 12 weeks was not significantly different for levonorgestrel intrauterine system and copper intrauterine device users (80% vs 93%; P=.14). CONCLUSION: Women initiating postplacental levonorgestrel intrauterine system are more likely to experience complete expulsion than those initiating copper intrauterine device. Using sonographic criteria results in higher expulsion rates than previously reported. It is unclear if such high expulsion rates would be identified following standard clinical practice.
引用
收藏
页码:674.e1 / 674.e8
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] POSTPLACENTAL LEVONORGESTREL AND COPPER INTRAUTERINE DEVICE INSERTION AFTER VAGINAL DELIVERY AND EXPULSION BY 12 WEEKS POSTPARTUM: A PROSPECTIVE COHORT STUDY
    Goldthwaite, L.
    Hyer, J.
    Sheeder, J.
    Tocce, K.
    Teal, S.
    CONTRACEPTION, 2016, 94 (04) : 387 - 387
  • [2] A prospective cohort study comparing expulsion after postplacental insertion: the levonorgestrel versus the copper intrauterine device
    Hinz, Erica K.
    Murthy, Amitasrigowri
    Wang, Binhuan
    Ryan, Nessa
    Ades, Veronica
    CONTRACEPTION, 2019, 100 (02) : 101 - 105
  • [3] Expulsion of Immediate Postplacental Copper IUDs at Six Weeks: A Prospective Cohort Study
    Gurney, Elizabeth
    Sonalkar, Sarita
    McAllister, Arden
    McClusky, Jessica
    Frarey, Alhambra
    Schreiber, Courtney
    OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2017, 129 : 10S - 10S
  • [4] Postplacental Insertion of Levonorgestrel Intrauterine System Versus Copper Intrauterine Device: A Prospective Study
    Elshamy, Elsayed
    Nofal, Ahmed
    Ibrrahim, Dalia
    JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY OF INDIA, 2021, 71 (02): : 150 - 155
  • [5] Postplacental Insertion of Levonorgestrel Intrauterine System Versus Copper Intrauterine Device: A Prospective Study
    Elsayed Elshamy
    Ahmed Nofal
    Dalia Ibrrahim
    The Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of India, 2021, 71 : 150 - 155
  • [6] Impact of training level on postplacental levonorgestrel 52 mg intrauterine device expulsion
    Cole, Madeline
    Thomas, Stephanie
    Mercer, Brian M.
    Arora, Kavita Shah
    CONTRACEPTION, 2019, 99 (02) : 94 - 97
  • [7] Immediate postplacental insertion of a copper intrauterine device: a pilot study to evaluate expulsion rate by mode of delivery
    Ayhan Sucak
    Sarp Ozcan
    Şevki Çelen
    Turhan Çağlar
    Gonca Göksu
    Nuri Danışman
    BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 15
  • [8] Malposition and Expulsion of Immediate Postplacental Intrauterine Devices
    Bala, Shruti
    OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2019, 133 : 171S - 171S
  • [9] Immediate postplacental insertion of a copper intrauterine device: a pilot study to evaluate expulsion rate by mode of delivery
    Sucak, Ayhan
    Ozcan, Sarp
    Celen, Sevki
    Caglar, Turhan
    Goksu, Gonca
    Danisman, Nuri
    BMC PREGNANCY AND CHILDBIRTH, 2015, 15
  • [10] Postplacental intrauterine device insertion at a teaching hospital
    Jatlaoui, Tara C.
    Marcus, Michele
    Jamieson, Denise J.
    Goedken, Peggy
    Cwiak, Carrie
    CONTRACEPTION, 2014, 89 (06) : 528 - 533