Safety of insertion of the copper IUD and LNG-IUS in nulliparous women: a systematic review

References

• Richters J, Fitzadam S, Yeung A, et al. Contraceptive practices among women: the second Australian study of health and relationships. Contraception. 2016;94:548–555.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rowe H, Holton S, Kirkman M, et al. Prevalence and distribution of unintended pregnancy: the understanding fertility management in Australia National Survey. Aust N Z J Public Health. 2016;40:104–109.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Day P, Lancaster O, Huang J. Australia’s mothers and babies 1994. Sydney: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare National Perinatal Statistics Unit; 1997.
   Google Scholar
• Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Australia’s mothers and babies 2015-In brief. Perinatal statistics series no. 33. Cat. no. PER 91. Canberra: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare; 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Wildemeersch D, Hasskamp T, Nolte K, et al. A multicenter study assessing uterine cavity width in over 400 nulliparous women seeking IUD insertion using 2D and 3D sonography. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2016;206:232–238.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mazza D, Bateson D, Frearson M, et al. Current barriers and potential strategies to increase the use of long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) to reduce the rate of unintended pregnancies in Australia: an expert roundtable discussion. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2017;57:206–212.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Black KI, Sakhaei T, Garland SM. A study investigating obstetricians’ and gynaecologists’ management of women requesting an intrauterine device. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2010;50:184–188.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luchowski AT, Anderson BL, Power ML, et al. Obstetrician-gynecologists and contraception: practice and opinions about the use of IUDs in nulliparous women, adolescents and other patient populations. Contraception. 2014;89:572–577.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whitaker AK, Johnson LM, Harwood B, et al. Adolescent and young adult women’s knowledge of and attitudes toward the intrauterine device. Contraception. 2008;78:211–217.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Black KI, Lotke P, Lira J, et al. Global survey of healthcare practitioners’ beliefs and practices around intrauterine contraceptive method use in nulliparous women. Contraception. 2013;88:650–656.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bühling KJ, Hauck B, Dermout S, et al. Understanding the barriers and myths limiting the use of intrauterine contraception in nulliparous women: results of a survey of European/Canadian healthcare providers. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2014;183:146–154.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thonneau P, Almont T, de La Rochebrochard E, et al. Risk factors for IUD failure: results of a large multicentre case-control study. Hum Reprod. 2006;21:2612–2616.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alton TM, Brock GN, Yang D, et al. Retrospective review of intrauterine device in adolescent and young women. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2012;25:195–200.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andersson K, Odlind V, Rybo G. Levonorgestrel-releasing and copper-releasing (Nova T) IUDs during five years of use: a randomized comparative trial. Contraception. 1994;49:56–72.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aoun J, Dines VA, Stovall DW, et al. Effects of age, parity, and device type on complications and discontinuation of intrauterine devices. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123:585–592.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bayer LL, Jensen JT, Li H, et al. Adolescent experience with intrauterine device insertion and use: a retrospective cohort study. Contraception. 2012;86:443–451.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Calzolari E, Masciangelo R, Ciampaglia G, et al. Failure in intrauterine contraception. Analysis of 137 cases of unfavourable outcome. Panminerva Med. 1992;34:19–23.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drake RW, Martins SL, Whitaker AK. Intrauterine device use in an urban university clinic: safety of use in a population at high risk for sexually transmitted infections. Contraception. 2015;92:319–322.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lete I, Morales P, de Pablo JL. Use of intrauterine contraceptive devices in nulliparous women: personal experience over a 12-year period. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 1998;3:190–193.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rossiter B, Gold MA, Super D, et al. Intrauterine device use among urban teens from 2000-2010: a descriptive study. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2012;25:e52–e53.
   Google Scholar
• Veldhuis HM, Vos AG, Lagro-Janssen AL. Complications of the intrauterine device in nulliparous and parous women. Eur J Gen Pract. 2004;10:82–77.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Weisberg E, Lukkari-Lax E, Roth K, et al. Efficacy and safety of the 13.5 mg (total content) levonorgestrel intrauterine contraceptive system in an Asia-Pacific population: results of a phase III study. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2015;131:E145.
   Google Scholar
• Farley TM, Rosenberg MJ, Rowe PJ, et al. Intrauterine devices and pelvic inflammatory disease: an international perspective. Lancet. 1992;339:785–788.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hubacher D. Intrauterine devices infection: review of the literature. Indian J Med Res 2014;140:S53–S57.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) - CDC Fact Sheet[internet]. Available from: www.cdc.gov/std/pid/stdfact-pid-detailed.htm (accessed 1 September 2017).
   Google Scholar
• Edelman AB, Schaefer E, Olson A, et al. Effects of prophylactic misoprostol administration prior to intrauterine device insertion in nulliparous women. Contraception. 2011;84:234–239.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Espey E, Singh RH, Leeman L, et al. Misoprostol for intrauterine device insertion in nulliparous women: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;210:e1–e5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lathrop E, Haddad L, McWhorter CP, et al. Self-administration of misoprostol prior to intrauterine device insertion among nulliparous women: a randomized controlled trial. Contraception. 2013;88:725–729.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Micks EA, Jensen JT, Bednarek PH. The effect of nitroglycerin on the IUD insertion experience in nulliparous women: a pilot study. Contraception. 2014;90:60–65.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swenson C, Turok DK, Ward K, et al. Self-administered misoprostol or placebo before intrauterine device insertion in nulliparous women: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2012;120:341–347.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maguire K, Davis A, Rosario Tejeda L, et al. Intracervical lidocaine gel for intrauterine device insertion: a randomized controlled trial. Contraception. 2012;86:214–219.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mody SK, Kiley J, Rademaker A, et al. Pain control for intrauterine device insertion: a randomized trial of 1% lidocaine paracervical block. Contraception. 2012;86:704–709.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rapkin RB, Achilles SL, Schwarz EB, et al. Self-administered lidocaine gel for intrauterine device insertion in nulliparous women: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2016;128:621–628.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vitti T, Ferriani R, Vieira C. Local anaesthetic in uterine cervix is not associated with lower pain score in levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system insertion in women without previous vaginal delivery. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2012;17:S104.
   Google Scholar
• Harrison-Woolrych M, Ashton J, Coulter D. Insertion of the multiload Cu375 intrauterine device; experience in over 16,000 New Zealand women. Contraception. 2002;66:387–391.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaislasuo J, Heikinheimo O, Lahteenmaki P, et al. Predicting painful or difficult intrauterine device insertion in nulligravid women. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;124:345–353.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marions L, Lovkvist L, Taube A, et al. Use of the levonorgestrel releasing-intrauterine system in nulliparous women – a non-interventional study in Sweden. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2011;16:126–134.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allen RH, Carey MS, Raker C, et al. A prospective cohort study of pain with intrauterine device insertion among women with and without vaginal deliveries. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2014;34:263–267.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bednarek PH, Micks EA, Edelman AB, et al. The effect of nitroprusside on IUD insertion experience in nulliparous women: a pilot study. Contraception. 2013;87:421–425.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aksoy H, Aksoy U, Ozyurt S, et al. Lidocaine 10% spray to the cervix reduces pain during intrauterine device insertion: a double-blind randomised controlled trial. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care. 2016;42:83–87.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karasu Y, Cömert DK, Karadağ B, et al. Lidocaine for pain control during intrauterine device insertion. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2017;43:1061–1066.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bahamondes L, Mansour D, Fiala C, et al. Practical advice for avoidance of pain associated with insertion of intrauterine contraceptives. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care. 2014;40:54–60.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Akers AY, Steinway C, Sonalkar S, et al. Reducing pain during intrauterine device insertion: a randomized controlled trial in adolescents and young women. Obstet Gynecol. 2017;130:795–802.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jephcott C, Grummet J, Nguyen N, et al. A review of the safety and efficacy of inhaled methoxyflurane as an analgesic for outpatient procedures. Br J Anaesth. 2018;120:1040–1048.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ward K, Jacobson JC, Turok DK, et al. A survey of provider experience with misoprostol to facilitate intrauterine device insertion in nulliparous women. Contraception 2011;84:594–599.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teal SB, Romer SE, Goldthwaite LM, et al. Insertion characteristics of intrauterine devices in adolescents and young women: success, ancillary measures, and complications. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;213:e1–e5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bahamondes MV, Hidalgo MM, Bahamondes L, et al. Ease of insertion and clinical performance of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system in nulligravidas. Contraception 2011;84:e11–e16.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dermish AI, Turok DK, Jacobson JC, et al. Failed IUD insertions in community practice: an under-recognized problem? Contraception. 2013;87:182–186.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harvey C, Bateson D, Wattimena J, et al. Ease of intrauterine contraceptive device insertion in family planning settings. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2012;52:534–539.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lassner KJ, Chen CH, Kropsch LA, et al. Comparative study of safety and efficacy of IUD insertions by physicians and nursing personnel in Brazil. Bull Pan Am Health Organ. 1995;29:206–215.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Santos ARG, Bahamondes MV, Hidalgo MM, et al. Pain at insertion of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system in nulligravida and parous women with and without cesarean section. Contraception. 2013;88:164–168.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bahamondes MV, Monteiro I, Canteiro R, et al. Length of the endometrial cavity and intrauterine contraceptive device expulsion. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2011;113:50–53.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Behringer T, Reeves MF, Rossiter B, et al. Duration of use of a levonorgestrel IUS amongst nulliparous and adolescent women. Contraception. 2011;84:e5–e10.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Brown WM, Trouton K. Intrauterine device insertions: which variables matter? J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care. 2014;40:117–121.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Garbers S, Haines-Stephan J, Lipton Y, et al. Continuation of copper-containing intrauterine devices at 6 months. Contraception. 2013;87:101–106.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gemzell-Danielsson K, Apter D, Hauck B, et al. The effect of age, parity and body mass index on the efficacy, safety, placement and user satisfaction associated with two low-dose levonorgestrel intrauterine contraceptive systems: subgroup analyses of data from a phase III trial. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0135309.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Madden T, McNicholas C, Zhao Q, et al. Association of age and parity with intrauterine device expulsion. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;124:718–726.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rivera R, Chen-Mok M, McMullen S. Analysis of client characteristics that may affect early discontinuation of the TCu-380A IUD. Contraception. 1999;60:155–160.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brockmeyer A, Kishen M, Webb A. Experience of IUD/IUS insertions and clinical performance in nulliparous women-a pilot study. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2008;13:248–254.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• A randomized multicentre trial of the Multiload 375 and TCu380A IUDs in parous women: three-year results. UNDP/UNFPA/WHO/World Bank, Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction: IUD Research Group. Contraception. 1994;49:543–549.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bayer Australia Ltd. Mirena product information. 2017. Available from: www.mirena.com/html/pdf/MirenaProductInformation.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Nelson AL. Intrauterine contraceptives. Gynecol Obstet. 2004;6:29.
   Google Scholar
• Andersson K, Batar I, Rybo G. Return to fertility after removal of a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device and Nova-T. Contraception 1992;46:575–584.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borgatta L, Nelson AL, Apter D, et al. Return to fertility after removal of two low-dose levonorgestrel intrauterine systems (LNG-IUS): results from a global, randomized, phase III study. Fertil Steril. 2013;100:S57–S58.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doll H, Vessey M, Painter R. Return of fertility in nulliparous women after discontinuation of the intrauterine device: comparison with women discontinuing other methods of contraception. Bjog. 2001;108:304–314.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Du J, Wu R, Lin X, et al. Investigation on the effect of intrauterine devices contraception for subsequent fertility. Fertil Steril. 2013;100:S315.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hov GG, Skjeldestad FE, Hilstad T. Use of IUD and subsequent fertility – follow-up after participation in a randomized clinical trial. Contraception. 2007;75:88–92.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hubacher D, Lara-Ricalde R, Taylor DJ, et al. Use of copper intrauterine devices and the risk of tubal infertility among nulligravid women. N Engl J Med. 2001;345:561–567.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dijkhuizen K, Dekkers OM, Holleboom CAG, et al. Vaginal misoprostol prior to insertion of an intrauterine device: an RCT. Hum Reprod. 2011;26:323–329.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heinemann K, Moehner S, Minh TD, et al. Intrauterine devices and the risk of uterine perforations: final results from the EURAS-IUD 5 years study. Contraception. 2016;94:387.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deans EI, Grimes DA. Intrauterine devices for adolescents: a systematic review. Contraception. 2009;79:418–423.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Armitage CM, Mitchell C, Wigan C, et al. Uptake and continuation rates of the intrauterine system in a university student general practice population in the UK. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care. 2013;39:186–189.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar