Clarification of the role of the Jaydess(Skyla) LNG- IUS 13.5mg and Kyleena LNG-IUS 19.5mg as intrauterine contraceptive systems

References

• Winner B, Peipert JF, Zhao Q, et al. Effectiveness of long-acting reversible contraception. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:1998–2007.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richter R. Ein Mittal zur Verhuetung der Konzeption. Deutsch Med Wschr. 1909;35:1525–1527.
   Google Scholar
• Pust K. Einbreichbarer Frauenschutz. Deutsch Med Wschr. 1923;49:952–953.
   Google Scholar
• Grafenberg E. Silk as anticoncipient. In editor., Bendix K. Geborten regelung - Vortraege und Verhandlung en des Aerztekursus vom 28-30 Dezember 1928. Berlin Selbsverlag. 1929.
   Google Scholar
• Thiery M. Pioneers of the intrauterine device. Eur J of Con Reprod Health Care. 1997;2;1:15–23. DOI:10.1080/13625189709049930.
   Google Scholar
• Luukkainen T. Progestin releasing intrauterine contraceptive device. In: editors, Bardin CW, Mishell DR. Proceedings from the Fourth International Conference on IUDs. Newton, MA, USA: Butterworth-Heineman; 1994. Ch 3. 32–41.
   Google Scholar
• Gemzell-Danielsson K, Schellschmidt I, Apter D. A randomized, phase II study describing the efficacy, bleeding profile, and safety of two low-dose levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine contraceptive systems and Mirena. Fertil Steril. 2012;97:616–22e1–3.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nelson AL, Apter D, Hauck B, et al. Two low-dose levonorgestrel intrauterine contraceptive systems: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2013;122:1205–1213.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Apter D, Gemzell-Danielsson K, Hauck B, et al. Pharmacokinetics of two low-dose levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine systems and effects on ovulation rate and cervical function: pooled analyses of phase II and III studies. Fertil Steril. 2014;101:e21656–62.
   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. 10(9):e0135309. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0135309.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nahum GG, Kaunitz AM, Rosen K, et al. Ovarian cysts: presence and persistence with use of a 13.5 mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system. Contraception. 2015;91:412–417.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borgatta L, Buhling KJ, Rybowski S, et al. A multicentre, open-label, randomised phase III study comparing a new levonorgestrel intrauterine contraceptive system (LNG-IUS 8) with combined oral contraception in young women of reproductive age. Eur J of Cont Reprod Heath Care. 2016;21:372–379.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Apter D, Briggs P, Tuppurainen M, et al. A 12-month multicenter, randomized study comparing the levonorgestrel intrauterine system with the etonogestrel subdermal implant. Fertil Steril. 2016;106:5e-151-7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gemzell-Danielsson K, Buhling KJ, Dermount SM, et al. A phase III, single-arm study of LNG-IUS 8, a low-dose levonorgestrel intrauterine contraceptive system (total content 13.5 mg) in postmenarcheal adolescents. Contraception. 2016;93:507–512.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gemzell-Danielsson K, Apter D, Dermout S, et al. Evaluation of a new, low-dose levonorgestrel intrauterine contraceptive system over 5 years of use. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2016. DOI:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2016.11.022
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guangsheng F, Kang S, Ren M, et al. A single-arm phase III study exploring the efficacy and safety of LNG-IUS 8, a low-dose levonorgestrel intrauterine contraceptive system (total content 13.5 mg), in an Asia-Pacific population. Contraception. 2016. DOI:10.1016/j.contraception.2016.11.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silverberg SG, Haukkamaa M, Arko H, et al. Endometrial morphology during long term use of levonorgestrel releasing intrauterine devices. Int J Gynecol Path. 1986;5:235–241.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google 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 caesarean section. Contraception. 2013;88:164–168.
   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(Suppl):S57.
   Google Scholar
• Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc. Mirena®, Kyleena®, Skyla® (levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system). Summary of product characteristics. 2017. [cited 2017 June 02]. Available from: http://www.bayer.com/html/products
   Google Scholar
• Wildemeersch D, Hasskamp T, Killian N, et al. A multicentre 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. DOI:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2016.09.023
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wildemeersch D, Hasskamp T, Goldstuck N. Side effects of intrauterine devices are often related to disproportion with the endometrial cavity—is there a role for pre-insertion ultrasound? Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2016;201:215–217.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wildemeersch D, Pett A, Jandi S, et al. Precision intrauterine contraception may significantly increase continuation of use: a review of long-term clinical experience with frameless copper-releasing intrauterine contraception devices. Int J Women’s Health. 2013;5:215–225.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rowe P, Farley T, Peregoudov A, et al. Safety and efficacy in parous women of a 52-mg levonorgestrel-medicated intrauterine device: a 7-year randomized comparative study tith the TCu380A. Contraception. 2016;93:498–506.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Creinin MD, Jansen R, Starr RM, et al. Levonorgestrel release rates over 5 years with the Liletta® 52-mg intrauterine system. Contraception. 2016;94:353–356. DOI:10.1016/j.contraception.2016.04.010.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Apter D, Zimmerman Y, Beekman L, et al. Bleeding pattern and cycle control with estetrol-containing combined oral contraceptives: results from a phase II, randomised, dose-finding study (FIESTA). Contraception. 2016;94:366–373.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Risk of thromboembolic disease in women taking oral contraceptives. A preliminary communication to the Medical Research Council by a Subcommittee. Br Med J. 1967;2:355–359.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pakarin P, Luukkainen T, Elomaa K, et al. A 12 month comparative clinical investigation of a levonorgestrel-releasing Intracervical device situated in the uterine cavity or cervical canal. Contraception. 1996;54:187–192.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wildemeersch D, Andrade A, Goldstuck N. Femilis®60 Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system-A review of 10 years of clinical experience. Clin Med Insights Reprod Health. 2016. DOI:10.4137/CMRH.S40087
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wildemeersch D, Andrade A, Goldstuck ND, et al. Intrauterine levonorgestrel delivery with frameless fibrous delivery system: review of clinical experience. Int J Womens Health. 2017;9:49–58.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wildemeersch D, Goldstuck ND, Jackers G. Results of a 5-year contraceptive trial in parous and nulliparous women with a new LNG-IUS. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2017;33(3):223–226.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wildemeesch D, Goldstuck ND, Hasskamp T. Intrauterine systems: a frameless future? Expert Opin Drug Deliv. 2016. DOI:10.1517/17425247.2016.1162153
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar