Risk–benefit effects of implantable contraceptives in women

Bibliography

• BOYCE J, FAWCETT JW, NOALL EW: Coronary thrombosis and Conovid. Lancet (1963) 1:111.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• VESSEY MP: Oral contraceptives and thromboembolic disease. Am. Heart (1969) 77:153–157.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SARTWELL PE, MASIE AT, ARTHES FG, GREEBE GR, SMITH HE: Thromboembolism and oral contraceptives: an epidemiologic case control study. Am. j Epidemiol (1969) 90:365–380.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MEIRIK O, FARLEY TM, SIVIN I: Safety and efficacy of levonorgestrel implants, intrauterine device, and sterilization. Obstet. Cyriecol (2001) 97:539–547
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• INTERNATIONAL COLLABORATIVE POSTMARKETING SURVEILLANCE OF NORPLANT: Postmarketing surveillance of Norplant® contraceptive implants: I. Contraceptive efficacy and reproductive health. Contraception (2001) 63:167–186.
   Google Scholar
• ••This large, controlled cohort study,conducted in eight developing countries, follows-up on 7977 Norplant and 6625 IUD initiators, as well as on 1419 women who chose tubal ligation for 5 years. The high efficacy of these methods, as well as the low incidence rates of major reproductive health problems, was confirmed. There was no significant excess of serious reproductive morbidity among Norplant users as compared to the two other groups.
   Google Scholar
• INTERNATIONAL COLLABORATIVE POSTMARKETING SURVEILLANCE OF NORPLANT: Postmarketing surveillance of Norplant® contraceptive implants: II. Non-reproductive health. Contraception (2001) 63:187–209.
   Google Scholar
• ••This large, controlled cohort studyconfirmed a low incidence rate of major non-reproductive health events as well as less serious health events among Norplant, IUD and tubal-ligated users. Norplant users did not have a significant excess risk of serious morbidity compared to controls, with the exception of gallbladder disease (RR 1.52) and hypertension and borderline hypertension (RR 1.81).
   Google Scholar
• CROXATTO HB, DIAZ S, PAVEZ M, MIRANDA E BRANDEIS A: Plasma progesterone levels during long-term treatment with levonorgestrel silastic implants. Acta Endocrinol (1982) 101:307–311.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• BRACHE V, FAUNDES A, JOHANSSON E, ALVAREZ F: Anovulation, inadequate luteal phase and poor sperm penetration in cervical mucus during prolonged use of Norplant® implants. Contraception (1985) 31:261–273.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CROXATTO HB, DIAZ S, SALVATIERRA AM, MORALES P, EBENSPERGER C, BRANDEIS A: Treatment with Norplant® subdermal implants inhibits sperm penetration through cervical mucus in vitro. Contraception (1987) 36:193–201.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BRACHE V, ALVAREZ-SANCHEZ F, FAUNDES A, TEJADA AS, COCHON L: Ovarian endocrine function through five years of continuous treatment with Norplant® subdermal contraceptive implants. Contraception (1990) 41:169–177.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DUNSON TR, BLUMENTHAL PD, ALVAREZ F et al: Timing of onset of contraceptive effectiveness in Norplant implant users: I. Changes in cervical mucus. Feral. Steril. (1998) 69:258–266.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CROXATTO HB: Mechanisms that explain the contraceptive action of progestin implants for women. Contraception (2002) 65:21–27.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ••A thorough review of studies exploring themechanism of action of contraceptive implants. The main mechanisms are interference with the ovulatory process and changing the quality of the cervical mucus, making sperm migration to the site of fertilisation difficult.
   Google Scholar
• MAKARAINEN L, VAN BEEK A, TUOMIVAARA L, ASPLUND B, COELINGH BENNINK H: Ovarian function during the use of a single contraceptive implant: Implanon compared with Norplant. Feral Steril (1998) 69:714–721.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• POPULATION COUNCIL: Norplant, levonorgestrel implants: a summary of scientific data. New York, USA (1990).
   Google Scholar
• VARMA R, MASCARENHAS L: Endometrial effects of etonogestrel (Implanon) contraceptive implant. Cum: Opiri. Obstet. Cyriecol. (2001) 13(3):335–341.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SEGAL S, ALVAREZ F, BRACHE V, FAUNDES A, VILJA P, TUOHIMA P: Norplant implants: the mechanism of contraceptive action. Feral. Steril. (1991) 56(2):273–277.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MEIRIK O, FRASER I, D'ARCANGUES C: Implantable contraceptives for women. Hum. Reprod. Update (2003) 9:49–59.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CHIKAMATA DM, MILLERS: Health services at the clinical level and implantable contraceptives for women. Contraception (2002) 65:97–106.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• •A review of the essential components and training necessary for the establishment and maintenance of quality implant service delivery systems.
   Google Scholar
• GU SJ, DU MK, ZHANG LD, LIU YL, WANG SH, SIVIN I: A 5-year evaluation of NORPLANT contraceptive implants in China. Obstet. Cyriecol (1994) 83:673–678.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• •A very large study of 10,718 Norplant acceptors in China showing a 5-year pregnancy rate of 0.3%, a 5-year cumulative continuation rate of 72.1% and a low rate of serious adverse events.
   Google Scholar
• CRAVIOTO MC, ALVARADO G, CANTO-DE-CETINA T et al: A multicenter comparative study on the efficacy, safety, and acceptability of the contraceptive subdermal implants Norplant and Norplant-II. Contraception (1997) 55:359–367.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• •A comparative Phase III clinical trial involving 1052 women followed up for 3 years, concluding that Norplant and Jadelle are equally effective, safe and acceptable in Mexican women.
   Google Scholar
• SIVIN I, ALVAREZ F, MISHELL DR Jr et al.: Contraception with two levonorgestrel rod implants. A 5-year study in the United States and Dominican Republic. Contraception (1998) 58:275–282.
   Google Scholar
• ••A multi-centre trial enrolling 594 womenthat confirms the safety and contraceptive efficacy of Jadelle.
   Google Scholar
• SIVIN I, CAMPODONICO I, KIRIWAT O et al.: The performance of levonorgestrel rod and Norplant contraceptive implants: a 5-year randomized study. Hum. Reprod. (1998) 13:3371–3378.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ••A large, multi-centre internationalcomparative trial between Norplant and Jadelle, involving 1198 women, demonstrating similar performance between both systems, except for faster and easier removal with Jadelle.
   Google Scholar
• SIVIN I, MISHELL DR Jr, DARNEY P, WAN L, CHRIST M: Levonorgestrel capsule implants in the United States: a 5-year study. Obstet. Cynecol. (1998) 92:337-344. A multi-centre clinical trial conducted in the US, with only 'soft-tubing' Norplant capsules, showing that this design provides adequate contraceptive protection even in women weighing > 70 kg. Incidence rates for menstrual problems as well as other medical conditions are described.
   Google Scholar
• SIVIN I, MISHELL DR Jr, DIAZ S et al.: Prolonged effectiveness of Norplant® capsule implants: a 7-year study. Contraception (2000) 61:187–194.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• GLASIER A: Implantable contraceptives for women: effectiveness, discontinuation rates, return of fertility, and outcome of pregnancies. Contraception (2002) 65:29–37.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SIVIN I: Contraception with NORPLANT implants. Hum. Reprod (1994) 9:1818–1826.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CROXATTO HB, URBANCSEK J, MASSAI R, COELINGH BENNINK H, VAN BEEK A: A multi-centre efficacy and safety study of the single contraceptive implant Implanon. Implanon Study Group. Hum. Reprod (1999) 14:976–981.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CROXATTO HB, MAKARAINEN L: The pharmacodynamics and efficacy of Implanon. An overview of the data. Contraception (1998) 58(Suppl.):S91–S97.
   Google Scholar
• ••A summary of a series of clinical studiesconducted with Implanon, involving 2362 women, showing no pregnancies in 4103 WY of use. Review of studies of the mechanism of action are presented. A comparative Norplant arm was included in a subset of studies.
   Google Scholar
• PETERSON HB, ZIA Z, HUGHES JM: The risk of pregnancy after tubal sterilization: findings from the US Collaborative Review of Sterilization. Am. J. Obstet. Cyriecol. (1996) 174:1161–1168.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ODLIND V, OLSSON SE: Enhanced metabolism of levonorgestrel during phenytoin treatment in a woman with Norplant implants. Contraception (1986) 33(3):257–261.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ORTAYLI N: Users' perspectives on implantable contraceptives for women. Contraception (2002) 65:107–112.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ROSENBERG M, WAUGH MS: Causes and consequences of oral contraceptive noncompliance. Am. j. Obstet. Cyriecol. (1999) 180:276–279.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CROXATTO HB, DIAZ S, PAVEZ M, CARDENAS H, LARSSON M, JOHANSSON ED: Clearance of levonorgestrel from the circulation following removal of Norplant subdermal implants. Contraception (1988) 38:509–523.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HUBER J: Pharmacokinetics of Implanon. An integrated analysis. Contraception (1998) 58:S85–S90.
   Google Scholar
• SIVIN I, STERN J, DIAZ S et al.: Rates and outcomes of planned pregnancy after use of Norplant capsules, Norplant II rods, or levonorgestrel-releasing or copper TCu 380Ag intrauterine contraceptive devices. Am. j. Obstet. Cyriecol. (1992) 166:1208–1213.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• •A multi-centre prospective study of 372 women discontinuing either Norplant, Jadelle, levonorgestrel or copper IUDs for planning pregnancy that confirmed recovery of normal fertility rates postdiscontinuation. Duration of use did not affect pregnancy rates.
   Google Scholar
• TRUSSELL J, VAUGHAN B: Contraceptive failure, method-related discontinuation and resumption of use: results from the 1995 National Survey of Family Growth. Fain. Plann. Perspect. (1999) 31:64–72.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• CURTIS KM: Safety of implantable contraceptives for women: data from observational studies. Contraception (2002) 65:85–96.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ••A review of findings from observationalstudies on the safety of contraceptive implants and the risk of specific health outcomes. Evidence suggests that implants are safe and users do not experience adverse events at rates higher than women not using implants.
   Google Scholar
• DORFLINGER LJ: Metabolic effects of implantable steroid contraceptives for women. Contraception (2002) 65:47–62.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ••A review evaluating the metabolic effects ofcurrent progestin implants, concluding that effects as a whole were minimal and any changes were generally within the normal range, and therefore unlikely to be of clinical significance. However, attention is called to the fact that all of these studies had been conducted in healthy populations.
   Google Scholar
• BRACHE V, FAUNDES A, ALVAREZ E COCHON L: Nonmenstrual adverse events during use of implantable contraceptives for women: data from clinical trials. Contraception (2002) 65:63–75.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ••A review of the available literature onimplantable contraceptives regarding non-menstrual adverse events. Headaches, acne, weight gain, dizziness, and mood changes are frequently reported and may be steroid-related. Loss of libido, fatigue, hair loss and other skin conditions are less frequently reported.
   Google Scholar
• NAESSEN T, OLSSON SE, GUDMUNDSON J: Differential effects on bone density of progestogen-only methods for contraception in premenopausal women. Contraception (1995) 52:35–39.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DI X, LI Y, ZHANG C, JIANG J, GUS:Effects of levonorgestrel-releasing subdermal contraceptive implants on bone density and bone metabolism. Contraception (1999) 60:161–166.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BEERTHUIZEN R, VAN BEEK A, MASSAI R, MAKARAINEN L, HOUT J, BENNINK HC: Bone mineral density during long term use of the progestagen contraceptive implant Implanon compared to a non-hormonal method of contraception. Hum. Reprod (2000) 15:118–122.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• PETITTI DB, PIAGGIO G, MEHTA S, CRAVIOTO MC, MEIRIK O: Steroid hormone contraception and bone mineral density: a cross-sectional study in an international population. The WHO Study of Hormonal Contraception and Bone Health. Obstet. Cyriecol. (2000) 95:736–744.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• •• A multi-centre, cross-sectional study involving 610 Norplant, 819 oral contraceptive, and 350 depo-medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA) users, and 695 never used hormonal contraceptives controls suggesting that hormonal contraceptive use by young adult women is associated with small changes in bone mineral density that occur early after initiation of use and are reversible.
   Google Scholar
• CROMER BA, BLAIR JM, MAHAN JD, ZIBNERS L, NAUMOVSKI Z: A prospective comparison of bone density in adolescent girls receiving depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (Depo-Provera), levonorgestrel (Norplant) or oral contraceptives. j. Pediam (1996) 129:671–676.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DU MK, CHEN CH, ZHENG HM: An analysis of vaginal bleeding patterns in users of Norplant implants. Reprod. Contraception (1998) 9:11–18.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• FAUNDES A, SIVIN I, STERN J: Long acting contraceptive implants. An analysis of menstrual bleeding patterns. Contraception (1978) 18:355–365.
   Google Scholar
• SHOUPE D, MISHELL DR Jr, BOPP BL, FIELDING M: The significance of bleeding
   Google Scholar
• •• patterns in Norplant implant users. Obstet. Cynecol (1991) 77(2):256–260.
   Google Scholar
• AFFANDI B: An integrated analysis of vaginal bleeding patterns in clinical trials of Implanon. Contraception (1998) 58:S99–S107.
   Google Scholar
• •A comparison of bleeding patterns among 1716 Implanon users and 689 Norplant users. Implanon users had more amenorrhea, but no statistically significant differences in discontinuation due to bleeding patterns was observed between the two systems.
   Google Scholar
• ZHENG SR, ZHENG HM, QIAN SZ, SANG GW, KAPER RF: A randomized multicenter study comparing the efficacy and bleeding pattern of a single-rod (Implanon) and six-capsule (Norplant) hormonal contraceptive implant. Contraception (1999) 60:1–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SIVIN I, VIEGAS O, CAMPODONICO I et al.: Clinical performance of a new two-rod levonorgestrel contraceptive implant: a three-year randomized study with Norplant implants as controls. Contraception (1997) 55:73–80.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ROGERS P, SALAMONSEN L: Steroids and endometrial breakthrough bleeding. Hum. Reprod. 15\(Suppl. 3):207.
   Google Scholar
• HICKEY M, D'ARCANGES C: Vaginal bleeding disturbances and implantable contraceptives. Contraception (2002) 65:75–84.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• •A review of the menstrual bleeding disturbances associated with implantable contraceptive use, as well as a summary of recent evidence of the possible mechanisms underlying breakthrough bleeding.
   Google Scholar
• DIAZ S, CROXATTO HB, PAVEZ M, BELHADJ H, STERN J, SIVIN I: Clinical assessment of treatments for prolonged bleeding in users of Norplant implants. Contraception (1990) 42(1):97–109.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WITJAKSONO J, LAU TM, AFFANDI B, ROGERS PA: Oestrogen treatment for increased bleeding in Norplant users: preliminary results. Hum. Reprod. (1996) 11 (Suppl. 2):109–114.
   Google Scholar
• ALVAREZ-SANCHEZ F, BRACHE V, THEVENIN E COCHON L, FAUNDES A: Hormonal treatment for bleeding irregularities in Norplant implant users. Am. j Obstet. Cynecol (1996) 174(3):919–922.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BOONKASEMSANTI W, REINPRAYOON D, PRUKSANANONDA K et al: The effect of transdermal oestradiol on bleeding pattern, hormonal profiles and sex steroid receptor distribution in the endometrium of Norplant users. Hum. Reprod. (1996) 11\(Suppl. 2):115–123.
   Google Scholar
• KAEWRUDEE S, TANEEPANICHSKUL S, JAISAMRAUN U, REINAPRAYOON D: The effect of mefenamic acid on controlling irregular uterine bleeding secondary to Norplant use. Contraception (1999) 60(1):25–30.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ARCHER DE PHILPUT CA, WEBER ME: Management of irregular uterine bleeding and spotting associated with Norplant. Hum. Reprod. (1996) 11 (Suppl. 2):24–30.
   Google Scholar
• SIVIN I: International experience with NORPLANT and NORPLANT-2 contraceptives. Stud. Fam. Plain]. (1988) 19:81–94.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ZIMMERMAN M, HAFFEY J, CRANE E etal.: Assessing the acceptability of NORPLANT implants in four countries: findings from focus group research. Stud. Fam. Plain]. (1990) 21:92–103.
   Google Scholar
• URBANCSEK J: An integrated analysis of nonmenstrual adverse events with Implanon. Contraception (1998) 58:S109–S115.
   Google Scholar
• ••An analysis of non-menstrual adverseevents observed in multiple Implanon clinical trials, reporting acne, breast pain, headache and weight gain as the most frequent complaints. A subset of the studies had a comparative Norplant arm.
   Google Scholar
• KLAVON SL, GRUBB GS: Insertion site complications during the first year of Norplant use. Contraception (1990) 41:27–37.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MASCARENHAS L: Insertion and removalof Implanon. Contraception (1998) 58:S79–S83.
   Google Scholar
• THOMSEN RJ, PASQUALE S, NOSHER J: Ultrasound visualization of Norplant subdermal contraceptive devices. Int. J. Cynaecol. Obstet. (1985) 23:223–227.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• THURMOND AS, WEINSTEIN AS, JONES MK, JENSEN JT, NICHOLS MD: Localization of contraceptive implant capsules for removal. Radiology (1994) 193:580–581.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SMITH JM, CONWIT RA, BLUMENTHAL PD: Ulnar nerve injury associated with removal of Norplant implants. Contraception (1998) 57:99–101.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ALVAREZ E BRACHE V, FAUNDES A, JORGE A, SOUSA MH: Local side effects observed among long term users of Norplant contraceptive implants. Contraception. Submitted.
   Google Scholar
• FAUNDES A, BRACHE V, ALVAREZ F: Functional life-span of the dominant follicle in pharmacologically induced anovulatory cycles. Hum. Reprod. (1995) 11:114–116.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• OLSSON SE, BAKOS O, LINDGREN PG, ODLIND V, WIDE L: Ovarian function during use of subdermal implants releasing low doses of levonorgestrel. Br j Fam. Plarm. (1990) 16:88–93.
   Google Scholar
• SHOUPE D, HORENSTEIN J, MISHELL DR Jr, LACARRA M, MEDEARIS A: Characteristics of ovarian follicular development in Norplant users. Feral Steril. (1991) 55:766–770.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SHAABAN MM, GHANEIMAH SA, SEGAL S, KHALIFA EA, SALEM HT, AHMED AG: Sonographic assessment of ovarian and endometrial changes during long-term Norplant use and their correlation with hormonal levels. Feral Steril. (1993) 59:998–1002.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ALVAREZ F, BRACHE V, FAUNDES A, TEJADA AS, THEVENIN F: Ultrasonographic and endocrine evaluation of ovarian function among Norplant implants users with regular menses. Contraception (1996) 54:275–279.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ALVAREZ-SANCHEZ F, BRACHE V, MONTES-DE-OCA V, COCHON L, FAUNDES A: Prevalence of enlarged ovarian follicles among users of levonorgestrel subdermal contraceptive implants (Norplant). Am. j Obstet. Cynecol. (2000) 182:535–539.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DRESSER R: Long-term contraceptives in the criminal justice system. In: Long Acting Contraception. Moral Choices, Policy Dilemmas (1995). Special Suppl. Hastings Center Report:515–519.
   Google Scholar
• DAVIDSON AR, KALMUSS D: Topics for our times: Norplant coercion - an overstated threat. Am. j Public Health (1997) 87(4):550–551.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• UNITED NATIONS: Report of the International Conference on Population and Development, 5–13 September, Cairo, Africa (1994).
   Google Scholar
• UNITED NATIONS: Report of the Fourth World Conference on Women, 4–15 September, Beijing, China (1995).
   Google Scholar
• GUDORF CE: Contraception and Abortion in Roman Catholicism. In: Sacred Rights: the Case for Contraception and Abortion in World Religions. Maguire DC (Ed.). In Press.
   Google Scholar
• POLLACK AE: One hundred and seventy million sterilizations later: what we know and what we wish to know. In: Contraceptive research and development, 1984 to 1994. The road from Mexico City to Cairo and beyond. Van Look PFA, Perez-Palacios G (Eds), Oxford University Press, Delhi, India (1994):215–232.
   Google Scholar
• HARDY E, BAHAMONDES L, OSIS MJ, COSTA RG, FAUNDES A: Risk factors for tubal sterilization regret, detectable before surgery. Contraception (1996) 54(3):159–162.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MARCIL-GRATTON N: Sterilization regret among women in metropolitan Montreal. Fara Plann. Perspect. (1988) 20(5):222–227.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• MCCARTHY M: US contraceptive prices too high? Lancet (1994) 343(8901):844.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar