The GyneFix® implant systems for interval, postabortal and postpartum contraception: a significant advance in long-term reversible contraception

References

• World Health Organization. Mechanism of action, safety and efficacy of intrauterine devices. 1987, Technical Report Series 753
   Google Scholar
• International Planned Parenthood Federation. Statement on intrauterine devices (IUDs). 1989, International Medical Advisory Panel 1987
   Google Scholar
• American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Technical Bulletin February, 1992, 164
   Google Scholar
• Maulding WP, Segal SJ. (1994) IUD use throughout the world: past, present and future. A New Look at IUDs—Advancing Contraceptive Choices; IUD Conference, New York, March, 1992. Butterworth-Heinemann, Boston, 1–10
   Google Scholar
• Forrest JD. (1994) Acceptability of IUDs in the United States. A New Look at IUDs—Advancing Contraceptive Choices; IUD Conference, New York, March, 1992. Butterworth-Heinemann, Boston, 90–99
   Google Scholar
• Treiman K, Liskin L. IUDs—a new look. Population Reports 1988, Series B, No 5
   Google Scholar
• International Working Group on Enhancing Patient Compliance and Oral Contraceptive Efficacy. A concensus statement: enhancing patient compliance and oral contraceptive efficacy. Br J Fam Plann 1993; 18: 126–9
   Google Scholar
• Batar I. Post-abortal IUD insertion: the challenge to minimize expulsion. Presented at the 4th Congress of the European Society of Contraception, BarcelonaSpain, June, 1996
   Google Scholar
• Chi IC, Farr G. Postpartum IUD contraception-a review of an international experience. Adv Contracept 1989; 5: 127–46
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hasson HM. Clinical Studies of the Wing Sound II Metrology Device. Intrauterine Contraception: Advances and Future Prospects, GI Zatuchni, A Goldsmith, JJ Sciarra. Harper & Row, Philadelphia 1984; 126–41
   Google Scholar
• Kurz KH. Cavimeter Uterine Measurement and IUD Clinical Correlation. Intrauterine Contraception: Advances and Future Prospects, GI Zatuchni, A Goldsmith, JJ Sciarra. Harper & Row, Philadelphia 1984; 142–62
   Google Scholar
• Van Kets H. Clinical performance of intrauterine devices. State University Ghent, Belgium 1990, Thesis, Faculty of Medicine
   Google Scholar
• The TCu380 Intrauterine Device: A Summary of Scientific Data. The Population Council, New York 1992
   Google Scholar
• Rowe PJ. (1994) Copper IUDs 1987–1992: Un Update. A New Look at IUDs -Advancing Contraceptive Choices; IUD Conference, New York, March, 1992. Butterworth-Heinemann, Boston, 13–31
   Google Scholar
• Kaivola S. Postremoval assessment of the intrauterine position of the IUDs: an analysis of 1012 removals with special reference to pregnancy risk and dislocation. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society for the Advancement of Contraception, Singapore, 1990
   Google Scholar
• Saure A, Hirvonen E, Kivijärvi A, Timonen H. Comparative Performance of Fincoid, Nova-T, and Multiload 375 IUDs. Intrauterine Contraception: Advances and Future Prospects, GI Zatuchni, A. Goldsmith, JJ Sciarra. Harper & Row, Philadelphia 1984; 104–8
   Google Scholar
• Hirvonen E, Kaivola S. A New Copper IUD (Fincoid) in Adolescent and Young Nulliparous Women. Contracept Deliv Syst 1983; 4: 149–52
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rybo G. (1994) IUD use and endometrial bleeding. A New Look at IUDs—Advancing Contraceptive Choices; IUD Conference, New York, March, 1992. Butterworth-Heinemann, Boston, 210–18
   Google Scholar
• Sivin I, Stern J. Long-acting, more effective Copper T IUDs: A Summary of Experience, 1970–75. Stud Fam Plann 1979; 10: 263–81
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roy S, Cooper DL, Mishell DR., Jr. Experience with three different models of the Copper T intrauterine device in nulliparous women. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1974; 119: 414–17
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diaz J, Neto A MP, Bahamondes L, Diaz M, Aece E, Castro S. Performance of the Copper T 200 in parous adolescents: are copper IUDs suitable for these women. Contraception 1993; 48(1)23–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• More than half of all pregnant women suffer from anemia. World Health Organization press release. March, 1993
   Google Scholar
• Bonnar J, Sheppard BL. Fibrinolytic activity and intrauterine contraceptive devices. Intrauterine Contraception: Advances and Future Prospects, GI Zatuchni, A Goldsmith, JJ Sciarra. Harper & Row, Philadelphia 1984; 307–18
   Google Scholar
• Hasson HM. Uterine geometry and IUD performance. Medicated Intrauterine Devices: Physiological and Clinical Aspects, E SE Hafez, W AA van Os. Martinus Nijhoff, Amsterdam 1980; 11–21
   Google Scholar
• Pizarro E, Schöenstedt G, Mehech G, Hidalgo M, Romero C, Muø G. Uterine cavity and the location of IUDs following administration of meclofenamic acid to menorrhagic women. Contraception 1989; 40: 413–23
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guidoin R, Courtney JM, Brault R. Intra-uterine devices: a SEM study on the Dalkon Shield. Biomater Med Devices Artif Organs 1976; 4: 81–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strecker JR, Kraus H. Unusual uterine perforation by the Copper T device and removal by laparoscopy. Contraception 1976; 13: 47–53
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Landeman R, Kay R, Wilson K. A two man experience with the Copper T intrauterine device. Contraception 1973; 7: 477–86
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khatamee MA, Lehfeldt H. Hysterographic studies in women wearing copperT devices. Adv Plann Parenthood 1975; 10: 90
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Anteby E, Revel A, Ben-Chetrit A, Rosen B, Tadmor O, Yagel S. Intrauterine device failure: relationship to its location within the uterine cavity. Obstet Gynecol 1993; 81: 112–14
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang J, Feldblum PJ, Chi I-C, Farr MG. Risk factors for Copper T IUD Expulsion: An epidemiologic analysis. Contraception 1992; 46: 427–33
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andolsek J. Post-abortum IUD insertion. Medicated Intrauterine Devices: Physiological and Clinical Aspects, E SE Hafez, W AA van Os. Martinus Nijhoff, Amsterdam 1980; 137–45
   Google Scholar
• Thiery M, Van Kets H, Van der Pas H. Immediate postplacental IUD-insertion: the expulsion problem. Contraception 1985; 31: 331–49
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wildemeersch D, Van der Pas H, Thiery M, Van Kets H, Parewijck W, Delbarge W. The Copper-Fix (Cu-Fix): a new concept in IUD technology. Adv Contracept 1988; 4: 197–205
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Coppens M, Thiery M, Delbarge W, Parewijck W, Van der Pas H, Van Kets H. The copper-fix IUD: assessment of tissue reaction at anchor site. Med Sci Res 1989; 17: 719
   Google Scholar
• Parewijck W, Wildemeersch D, Thiery M, Van der Pas H, Van Kets H, Delbarge W. The FlexiGard® (CuFix): updated experience. Presented at the World Congress on Human Reproduction, Helsinki, June, 1990
   Google Scholar
• Batar I. One-year clinical experience with FlexiGard®. Contraception 1992; 46: 307–12
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wildemeersch D, Defoort P, Martens G. The Flexigard® 330 ICC, an ultrasound evaluation. Contraception 1992; 46: 471–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wildemeersch D. (1994) The CuFix intrauterine copper contraceptive implant. A New Look at IUDs—Advancing Contraceptive Choices; IUD Conference, New York, March, 1992. Butterworth-Heinemann, Boston, 273–83
   Google Scholar
• Van Kets H, Wildemeersch D, Van der Pas H, Vrijens M, Van Trappen Y, Amy JJ, Batar I, Barri P, Martinez F, Iglesias-Cortit L, Shangchun Wu, Xiaoming Cao, Zuan-Chong Feng, Thiery M. IUD expulsion solved with implant technology. Contraception 1995; 51: 87–92
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wildemeersch D, Van Kets H, Van der Pas H, Vrijens M, Van Trappen Y, Amy JJ, Batar I, Barri P, Martinez F, Iglesias-Cortit L, Thiery M. IUD tolerance in nulligravid and parous women: optimal acceptance with the frameless CuFix implant system. Br J Fam Plann 1994; 20: 2–5
   Google Scholar
• Wildemeersch D, Defoort P, Thiery M, Tatum H. A new insertion-fixation instrument and technique for immediate postplacental insertion of intrauterine contraceptive devices (IUCD). Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Fertility Society, Toronto, 1986
   Google Scholar
• Van Kets H, Parewijck W, Van der Pas H, Batar I, Creatsas G, Koumantakis K, Thiery M. Immediate postplacental insertion and fixation of the CuFix postpartum implant system. Contraception 1993; 48: 349–57
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Batar I, Wildemeersch D, Van Kets H, Van Trappen Y, Van der Pas H, Creatsas G, Schacht E, Thiery M. New technology solves expulsion problem of immediate postplacental IUD insertion. Br J Fam Plann 1994; 20: 2–5
   Google Scholar
• Van Kets H, Vrijens M, Van Trappen Y, Delbarge W, Van der Pas H, Temmerman M, Batar I, Barri P, Martinez F, Iglesias-Cortit L, Shangchun Wu, Xiaoming Cao, Zuan-Chong Feng, Hui Wu Ming, Wildemeersch D, Pizarro E, Andrade A, Thiery M. GyneFix® intrauterine copper releasing implant system: a major improvement in efficacy, expulsion and tolerance. Adv Contracept 1995; 11: 131–42
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wu S. Multicenter randomized comparative clinical trial of GyneFix® vs. TCu380A. One-year interim analysis. 1996, Unpublished data
   Google Scholar
• Batar I, Wildemeersch D, Delbarge W, Vrijens M. Post-abortal insertion of GyneFix® PA. 6-months interim analysis of a multicenter trial in 98 women. 1996, Unpublished data on file
   Google Scholar
• Wu S. GyneFix® PP. 6-weeks interim analysis in 607 postplacental women. 1966, Unpublished data on file 49
   Google Scholar
• Vrijens M, Delbarge W, Wildemeersch D. GyneFix® in parous and nulliparous women: three-year results in three private practices in Belgium. 1996, Unpublished data on file
   Google Scholar
• Rosenberg MJ, Foldesy R, Mishell DR, Speroff L, Waugh MS, Burkman R. Performance of theTCu380A and Cu-Fix IUDs in an International Randomized Trial. Contraception 1996; 53: 197–203
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• UNDP, UNFPA, and WHO Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction, World Bank: IUD Research Group. The TCu380A IUD and the Frameless IUD “the FlexiGard“, Interim Three-Year Data from an International Multicenter Trial. Contraception 1995; 52: 77–83
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Atrash HK, Frye A, Hogue C JR (1994) Incidence of morbidity and mortality with IUD in situ in the 1980s and 1990s. A New Look at IUDs—Advancing Contraceptive Choices; IUD Conference, New York, March, 1992. Butterworth-Heinemann, Boston, 76–87
   Google Scholar
• Andrade A. Study of menstrual blood loss and iron stores in women wearers of two IUDs: TCu380A and Flexigard—final report. Bol Centr Biol Reprod. UFJF. 1996; vol. 15
   Google Scholar
• Wildemeersch D. CuFix implant—removal force. Results after long-term use. Interim report. 1993, Unpublished data on file
   Google Scholar
• Kurz KH. Role of retention in avoiding expulsion of IUDs—measuring devices for basic research. Contracept Deliv Syst 1982; 3: 107–16
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• van Os W AA. IUD: past—present-future. Adv Contracept 1989; 5: 205–12
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sivin I, Mahgoub SE, McCarthy, et al. Long-term contraception with the levonorgestrel 20 meg/day (LNg 20) and the CopperT380Ag intrauterine devices: a five-year randomized study. Contraception 1991; 44: 473–80
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Voluntary sterilization. November, 1990, Population Report series C, No. 10
   Google Scholar
• Petersen HB, Xia Z, Hughes JM, Xilcox LS, Tylor LR, Trussell J. for the US Collaborative Review of Sterilization Working Group. The risk of pregnancy after tubal sterilization: findings from the US Collaborative Review of Sterilization Working Group. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996; 174: 1161–70
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee NC, Rubin GL, Borucki R. The intrauterine device and pelvic inflammatory disease revisited: new results from the Women's Health Study. Obstet Gynecol 1988; 72: 1–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Family Health International. Use of IUDs in Developing Countries: A Comparative Study. FHI Network. 1991; vol 12: 2
   Google Scholar
• Struthers BJ. Copper IUDs, PID, and fertility in nulliparous women. Adv Contracept 1991; 7: 211–30
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Farley T MM, Rosenberg MJ, Rowe PJ, et al. Intrauterine devices and pelvic inflammatory disease: an international perspective. Lancet 1992; 339: 785–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grimes DA. The intrauterine device, pelvic inflammatory disease, and infertility: the confusion between hypothesis and knowledge. Fertil Steril 1992; 58: 670–3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beerthuizen R JCm. PID in IUD users: A review. Eurf Contracept Repro Health Care 1996; 1: 237–43
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wilson JC. A prospective New Zealand study of fertility after removal of copper intrauterine devices for contraception and because of complications: a four-year study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1989; 160: 391–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skjeldestad FE. (1994) Conception rates post removal. A New Look at IUDs—Advancing Contraceptive Choices; IUD Conference, New York, March, 1992. Butterworth-Heinemann, Boston, 63–75
   Google Scholar
• Diczfalusy E. Contraceptive prevalence, reproductive health and our common future. Contraception 1991; 43: 201–27
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mumford SD, Kessel E. Sterilization needs in the 1990s. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1992; 167: 1203–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kovács L. Abortions in Eastern Europe: political and social influences on women's choices of fertility regulation. Presentation held at the 11th Congress of the European Association of Gynaecologists and Obstetricians, BudapestHungary, June, 1996
   Google Scholar
• United Nations. Abortion policies, a global review. 1992, Publication ST/ESA/Ser.A/129
   Google Scholar