Literature DB >> 29870737

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

Elizabeth P Gurney1, Sarita Sonalkar2, Arden McAllister2, Mary D Sammel3, Courtney A Schreiber2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Immediate placement of an intrauterine device after vaginal delivery is safe and convenient, but longitudinal data describing clinical outcomes have been limited.
OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine the proportion of TCu380A (copper) intrauterine devices expelled, partially expelled, malpositioned, and retained, as well as contraceptive use by 6 months postpartum, and determine risk factors for expulsion and partial expulsion. STUDY
DESIGN: In this prospective, observational study, women who received a postplacental TCu380A intrauterine device at vaginal delivery were enrolled postpartum. Participants returned for clinical follow-up at 6 weeks, and for a research visit with a pelvic exam and ultrasound at 6 months. We recorded intrauterine device outcomes and 6-month contraceptive use. Partial expulsion was defined as an intrauterine device protruding from the external cervical os, or a transvaginal ultrasound showing the distal end of the intrauterine device below the internal os of the cervix. Multinomial logistic regression models identified risk factors associated with expulsion and partial expulsion by 6 months. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve was used to assess the ability of a string check to predict the correct placement of a postplacental intrauterine device. The primary outcome was the proportion of intrauterine devices expelled at 6 months.
RESULTS: We enrolled 200 women. Of 162 participants with follow-up data at 6 months, 13 (8.0%; 95% confidence interval, 4.7-13.4%) experienced complete expulsion and 26 (16.0%; 95% confidence interval, 11.1-22.6%) partial expulsion. Of 25 malpositioned intrauterine devices (15.4%; 95% confidence interval, 10.2-21.9%), 14 were not at the fundus (8.6%; 95% confidence interval, 5.2-14.1%) and 11 were rotated within the uterus (6.8%; 95% confidence interval, 3.8-11.9%). Multinomial logistic regression modeling indicated that higher parity (odds ratio, 2.05; 95% confidence interval, 1.21-3.50; P = .008) was associated with expulsion. Provider specialty (obstetrics vs family medicine; odds ratio, 5.31; 95% confidence interval, 1.20-23.59; P = .03) and gestational weight gain (normal vs excess; odds ratio, 9.12; 95% confidence interval, 1.90-43.82; P = .004) were associated with partial expulsion. Long-acting reversible contraceptive method use at 6 months was 80.9% (95% confidence interval, 74.0-86.6%). At 6 weeks postpartum, 35 of 149 (23.5%; 95% confidence interval, 16.9-31.1%) participants had no intrauterine device strings visible. Sensitivity of a string check to detect an incorrectly positioned intrauterine device was 36.2%, and specificity of the string check to predict a correctly positioned intrauterine device was 84.5%. This corresponds to an area under the receiver operating characteristics curve of 0.5.
CONCLUSION: This prospective assessment of postplacental TCu380A intrauterine device placement, with ultrasound to confirm device position, finds a complete intrauterine device expulsion proportion of 8.0% at 6 months. The association of increasing parity with expulsion is consistent with prior research. The clinical significance of covariates associated with partial expulsion (provider specialty and gestational weight gain) is unclear. Due to the observational study design, any associations cannot imply causality. The proportion of partially expelled and malpositioned intrauterine devices was high, and the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve of 0.5 indicates that a string check is a poor test for assessing device position. Women considering a postplacental intrauterine device should be counseled about the risk of position abnormalities, as well as the possibility of nonvisible strings, which may complicate clinical follow-up. The clinical significance of intrauterine device position abnormalities is unknown; future research should evaluate the influence of malposition and partial expulsion on contraceptive effectiveness and side effects.
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  TCu380A intrauterine device; copper intrauterine device; intrauterine device; intrauterine device complication; intrauterine device expulsion; intrauterine device retention; long-acting reversible contraception; postpartum contraception; postpartum intrauterine device; postplacental intrauterine device; vaginal delivery

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29870737      PMCID: PMC6125156          DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2018.05.032

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0002-9378            Impact factor:   8.661


  29 in total

1.  The postpartum visit: it's time for a change in order to optimally initiate contraception.

Authors:  Leon Speroff; Daniel R Mishell
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2008-06-12       Impact factor: 3.375

2.  Comparison of efficacy and complications of IUD insertion in immediate postplacental/early postpartum period with interval period: 1 year follow-up.

Authors:  Kafiye Eroğlu; Gülcihan Akkuzu; Gülşen Vural; Berna Dilbaz; Ayşe Akin; Lale Taşkin; Ali Haberal
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2006-09-15       Impact factor: 3.375

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

Authors:  Lisa M Goldthwaite; Jeanelle Sheeder; Jennifer Hyer; Kristina Tocce; Stephanie B Teal
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2017-08-19       Impact factor: 8.661

Review 4.  Society of Family Planning Guidelines: Postplacental insertion of intrauterine devices.

Authors:  Amy K Whitaker; Beatrice A Chen
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2017-10-05       Impact factor: 3.375

5.  Timing of postpartum intrauterine device placement: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Chantel I Washington; Roxanne Jamshidi; Stephen F Thung; Unzila A Nayeri; Aaron B Caughey; Erika F Werner
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2014-10-25       Impact factor: 7.329

Review 6.  Immediate postpartum insertion of intrauterine device for contraception.

Authors:  Laureen M Lopez; Alissa Bernholc; David Hubacher; Gretchen Stuart; Huib A A M Van Vliet
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2015-06-26

Review 7.  Copper-containing, framed intrauterine devices for contraception: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Paul A O'Brien; Regina Kulier; Frans M Helmerhorst; Margaret Usher-Patel; Catherine d'Arcangues
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2008-03-18       Impact factor: 3.375

8.  Utilization of primary and obstetric care after medically complicated pregnancies: an analysis of medical claims data.

Authors:  Wendy L Bennett; Hsien-Yen Chang; David M Levine; Lin Wang; Donna Neale; Erika F Werner; Jeanne M Clark
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2014-01-29       Impact factor: 5.128

9.  Clinical outcomes of early postplacental insertion of intrauterine contraceptive devices.

Authors:  Sevki Celen; Perran Möröy; Ayhan Sucak; Ayla Aktulay; Nuri Danişman
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 3.375

10.  Immediate postplacental insertion of a copper intrauterine device: a pilot study to evaluate expulsion rate by mode of delivery.

Authors:  Ayhan Sucak; Sarp Ozcan; Şevki Çelen; Turhan Çağlar; Gonca Göksu; Nuri Danışman
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2015-09-02       Impact factor: 3.007

View more
  5 in total

1.  Expulsion of intrauterine devices after postpartum placement by timing of placement, delivery type, and intrauterine device type: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Sarah H Averbach; Yokabed Ermias; Gary Jeng; Kathryn M Curtis; Maura K Whiteman; Erin Berry-Bibee; Denise J Jamieson; Polly A Marchbanks; Naomi K Tepper; Tara C Jatlaoui
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2020-03-03       Impact factor: 8.661

2.  A Decision Analysis Model of 1-Year Effectiveness of Intended Postplacental Compared With Intended Delayed Postpartum Intrauterine Device Insertion.

Authors:  Sarita Sonalkar; Tegan Hunter; Elizabeth P Gurney; Arden McAllister; Courtney A Schreiber
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 7.661

3.  Postplacental Insertion of Levonorgestrel Intrauterine System Versus Copper Intrauterine Device: A Prospective Study.

Authors:  Elsayed Elshamy; Ahmed Nofal; Dalia Ibrrahim
Journal:  J Obstet Gynaecol India       Date:  2021-01-20

4.  Ultrasound assessment of postplacental copper intrauterine device position 6 months after placement during cesarean delivery.

Authors:  Elizabeth P Gurney; Arden McAllister; Britt Lang; Courtney A Schreiber; Sarita Sonalkar
Journal:  Contracept X       Date:  2020-10-09

5.  Assessment of a Novel Fixation Method of a Frameless Intrauterine Contraceptive Device Inserted during Cesarean Delivery as a Means of Preventing Displacements and Expulsions: A Prospective Observational Study.

Authors:  Hazal Kutlucan; Recep Onur Karabacak; Stefanie De Buyser; Ahmet Erdem; Nuray Bozkurt; Erhan Demirdağ; Dirk Wildemeersch
Journal:  Life (Basel)       Date:  2022-01-07
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.