Literature DB >> 18402846

Copper-containing, framed intrauterine devices for contraception: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

Paul A O'Brien1, Regina Kulier, Frans M Helmerhorst, Margaret Usher-Patel, Catherine d'Arcangues.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Intrauterine devices (IUDs) are safe and effective methods of long-term reversible contraception. The design and copper content as well as placement of the copper on IUDs could affect their effectiveness and side effect profile. We compared different copper IUDs for their effectiveness and side effects. STUDY
DESIGN: We searched multiple electronic databases with appropriate keywords and names of the IUDs known to be on the market. We searched the reference lists of papers identified and contacted authors when possible. There was no language restriction. Randomized controlled trials comparing different IUDs that reported on clinical outcomes were considered for inclusion. Two reviewers independently extracted data on outcomes and trial characteristics. We combined the trial results in meta-analyses and expressed results as rate difference (RD) using a fixed-effects model with 95% confidence interval (CI). In the presence of significant heterogeneity, a random-effects model was applied.
RESULTS: We included 35 trials, resulting in 18 comparisons of 10 different IUDs in approximately 48,000 women. TCu380A was more effective in preventing pregnancy than MLCu375 (RD 1.70%, 95% CI 0.07-2.95% after 4 years of use). TCu380A was also more effective than MLCu250, TCu220 and TCu200. There tended to be fewer pregnancies with TCu380S compared to TCu380A after the first year of use, a difference which was statistically significant in the fourth year (RD -1.62%, 95% CI -3.00% to -0.24%). This occurred despite more expulsions with TCu380S (RD 3.50%, 95% CI 0.36-6.63% at 4 years). MLCu375 was no more effective than TCu220 at 1 year of use, or MLCu250 and NovaT up to 3 years. Compared to TCu380A or TCu380S, none of the IUDs showed any benefits in terms of bleeding or pain or any of the other reasons for early discontinuation. None of the trials that reported events at insertion found one IUD easier to insert than another or caused less pain at insertion. There is no evidence that uterine perforation rates vary by type of device. There are minimal randomized data on IUD use in nulliparous women.
CONCLUSIONS: TCu380A and TCu380S appear to be more effective than other IUDs. No IUD showed consistently lower removal rates for bleeding and pain in comparison to other IUDs. There is no evidence that any particular framed copper device is better suited to women who have not had children.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18402846     DOI: 10.1016/j.contraception.2007.12.011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Contraception        ISSN: 0010-7824            Impact factor:   3.375


  20 in total

1.  Missing IUCD Strings: Role of Imaging in Locating the Misplaced Device.

Authors:  Deepti Goswami; Anoosha K Ravi; Akanksha Sharma
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2017-04-01

2.  Immediate postabortion intrauterine device insertion: continuation and satisfaction.

Authors:  Colleen McNicholas; Taylor Hotchkiss; Tessa Madden; Qiuhong Zhao; Jenifer Allsworth; Jeffrey F Peipert
Journal:  Womens Health Issues       Date:  2012 Jul-Aug

3.  Comparing Hemorrhages and Dysmenorrhea with Copper T380A and Multiload 375 Intrauterine Devices: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Mahnaz Shahnazi; Somayyeh Sarrafi; Mohammad Asgari Jafarabadi; Sahar Azari; Fariba Esmaili
Journal:  J Caring Sci       Date:  2014-09-01

4.  Comparing the effect of mefenamic Acid and vitex agnus on intrauterine device induced bleeding.

Authors:  Parisa Yavarikia; Mahnaz Shahnazi; Samira Hadavand Mirzaie; Yousef Javadzadeh; Razieh Lutfi
Journal:  J Caring Sci       Date:  2013-08-31

5.  The impact of an IUD and implant intervention on dual method use among young women: Results from a cluster randomized trial.

Authors:  Alison M El Ayadi; Corinne H Rocca; Julia E Kohn; Denisse Velazquez; Maya Blum; Sara J Newmann; Cynthia C Harper
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2016-10-20       Impact factor: 4.018

6.  Six-month expulsion of postplacental copper intrauterine devices placed after vaginal delivery.

Authors:  Elizabeth P Gurney; Sarita Sonalkar; Arden McAllister; Mary D Sammel; Courtney A Schreiber
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2018-06-02       Impact factor: 8.661

7.  Long-term safety, efficacy, and patient acceptability of the intrauterine Copper T-380A contraceptive device.

Authors:  Bliss Kaneshiro; Tod Aeby
Journal:  Int J Womens Health       Date:  2010-08-09

8.  Side effects from the copper IUD: do they decrease over time?

Authors:  David Hubacher; Pai-Lien Chen; Sola Park
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 3.375

9.  Cervical lidocaine for IUD insertional pain: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Colleen P McNicholas; Tessa Madden; Qiuhong Zhao; Gina Secura; Jenifer E Allsworth; Jeffrey F Peipert
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2012-09-20       Impact factor: 8.661

10.  Comparing the effectiveness of copper intrauterine devices available in Canada. Is FlexiT non-inferior to NovaT when inserted immediately after first-trimester abortion? Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Wendy V Norman; Jessica L Chiles; Caroline A Turner; Rollin Brant; Andra Aslan; Janusz Kaczorowski
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2012-08-24       Impact factor: 2.279

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.