Use of Norplant contraceptive implants in the immediate postpartum period: safety and tolerance

Postpartum contraception: A matter of guidelines

The postpartum period is the perfect time to access family planning services. WHO guidelines contraindicate combined hormonal contraceptives postpartum in breastfeeding patients between 6 weeks and 6 months after delivery (Medical Eligibility Criteria category 3). On the contrary, the Faculty of Sexual and Reproductive Healthcare and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines do not contraindicate their use in women who breastfeed from 6 weeks to 6 months postpartum. New combined hormonal contraceptives with natural estrogens have never been studied in this setting. Guidelines agree on the prescription of the progestin-only pill postpartum in non-breastfeeding women (category 1). Differences are found in women who breastfeed. In non-breastfeeding women, an implant is considered safe (category 1) by all guidelines, without any distinction in time. Regarding postpartum breastfeeding women, the guidelines for implants give quite different indications but are still permissive. Intrauterine devices are viable options for postpartum contraception but guidelines give different indications about the timing of insertion. Postplacental intrauterine device placement can reduce the subsequent unintended pregnancy rate, particularly in settings at greatest risk of not having recommended postpartum controls. However, it has yet to be understood whether this approach can really have an advantage in high-income countries. Postpartum contraception is not a 'matter of guidelines': it is the best customization for each woman, as early as possible but at the ideal timing.

Immediate versus delayed postpartum insertion of contraceptive implant and IUD for contraception

BACKGROUND

Long-acting reversible contraception (LARC), including intrauterine devices (IUDs) and contraceptive implants, are highly effective, reversible methods of contraception. Providing LARC methods during the postpartum period is important to support contraceptive choice, and to prevent unintended pregnancy and short interpregnancy intervals. Delaying offering contraception to postpartum people until the first comprehensive postpartum visit, traditionally at around six weeks postpartum, may put some postpartum people at risk of unintended pregnancy, either due to loss to follow-up or because of initiation of sexual intercourse prior to receiving contraception. Therefore, immediate provision of highly effective contraception, prior to discharge from hospital, has the potential to improve contraceptive use and prevent unintended pregnancies and short interpregnancy intervals.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the initiation rate, utilization rates (at six months and 12 months after delivery), effectiveness, and adverse effects of immediate versus delayed postpartum insertion of implants and IUDs for contraception.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and POPLINE for eligible studies up to December 2020. We examined review articles and contacted investigators. We checked registers of ongoing clinical trials, citation lists of included studies, key textbooks, grey literature, and previous systematic reviews for potentially relevant studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We sought randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared immediate postpartum versus delayed insertion of contraceptive implant and IUDs for contraception.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors (JS, SK) independently screened titles and abstracts of the search results, and assessed the full-text articles of potentially relevant studies for inclusion. They extracted data from the included studies, assessed risk of bias, compared results, and resolved disagreements by consulting a third review author (PL, SA or PP). We contacted investigators for additional data, where possible. We computed the Mantel-Haenszel or inverse variance risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for binary outcomes and the mean difference (MD) with 95% CI for continuous variables.

MAIN RESULTS

In this updated review, 16 studies met the inclusion criteria; five were studies of contraceptive implants (715 participants) and 11 were studies of IUDs (1894 participants). We identified 12 ongoing studies. We applied GRADE judgements to our results; the overall certainty of the evidence for each outcome ranged from moderate to very low, with the main limitations being risk of bias, inconsistency, and imprecision. Contraceptive implants Immediate insertion probably improves the initiation rate for contraceptive implants compared with delayed insertion (RR 1.48, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.98; 5 studies, 715 participants; I2 = 95%; moderate-certainty evidence). We are uncertain if there was a difference between the two groups for the utilization rate of contraceptive implants at six months after delivery (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.50; 3 studies, 330 participants; I2 = 89%; very low-certainty evidence) or at 12 months after insertion (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.04; 2 studies, 164 participants; I2 = 0%; very low-certainty evidence). People who received an immediate postpartum contraceptive implant insertion may have had a higher mean number of days of prolonged vaginal bleeding within six weeks postpartum (mean difference (MD) 2.98 days, 95% CI -2.71 to 8.66; 2 studies, 420 participants; I2 = 91%; low-certainty evidence) and a higher rate of other adverse effects in the first six weeks after birth (RR 2.06, 95% CI 1.38 to 3.06; 1 study, 215 participants; low-certainty evidence) than those who received a delayed postpartum insertion. We are uncertain if there was a difference between the two groups for prolonged bleeding at six months after delivery (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.29 to 4.94; 2 studies, 252 participants; I2 = 0%; very low-certainty evidence). There may be little or no difference between the two groups for rates of unintended pregnancy at six months (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.01 to 4.08; one study, 205 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether there was a difference in rates of unintended pregnancy at 12 months postpartum (RR 1.82, 95% CI 0.38 to 8.71; 1 study, 64 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There may be little or no difference between the two groups for any breastfeeding rates at six months (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.01; 2 studies, 225 participants; I2 = 48%; low-certainty evidence). IUDs Immediate insertion of IUDs probably improves the initiation rate compared with delayed insertion, regardless of type of IUD (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.51; 10 studies, 1894 participants; I2 = 98%; moderate-certainty evidence). However, people who received an immediate postpartum IUD insertion may have had a higher expulsion rate at six months after delivery (RR 4.55, 95% CI 2.52 to 8.19; 8 studies, 1206 participants; I2 = 31%; low-certainty evidence) than those who received a delayed postpartum insertion. We are uncertain if there was a difference between the two groups in the utilization of IUDs at six months after insertion (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.62; 6 studies, 971 participants; I2 = 96%; very low-certainty evidence) or at 12 months after insertion (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.5 to 1.47; 3 studies, 796 participants; I2 = 92%; very low-certainty evidence). Immediate IUDs insertion may reduce unintended pregnancy at 12 months (RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.41; 1 study, 1000 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether there was difference in any breastfeeding rates at six months in people receiving progestin-releasing IUDs (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.30; 5 studies, 435 participants; I2 = 54%; very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence from this updated review indicates that immediate postpartum insertion improves the initiation rate of both contraceptive implants and IUDs by the first postpartum visit compared to delayed insertion. However, it is not clear whether that there are differences in utilization rates at six and 12 months postpartum. We are uncertain whether there is any difference in the unintended pregnancy rate at 12 months. Provision of progestin-releasing implants and IUDs immediately postpartum may have little or no negative impact on breastfeeding. However, the expulsion rate of IUDs and prolonged vaginal bleeding associated with immediate implants appears to be higher.

Drug eluting implants in pharmaceutical development and clinical practice

Introduction: Drug eluting implants offer patient convenience and improved compliance through less frequent dosing, eliminating repeated, painful injections and providing localized, site specific delivery with applications in contraception, ophthalmology, and oncology.Areas covered: This review provides an overview of available implant products, design approaches, biodegradable and non-biodegradable polymeric materials, and fabrication techniques with a focus on commercial applications and industrial drug product development. Developing trends in the field, including expanded availability of suitable excipients, development of novel materials, scaled down manufacturing process, and a wider understanding of the implant development process are discussed and point to opportunities for differentiated drug eluting implant products.Expert opinion: In the future, long-acting implants will be important clinical tools for prophylaxis and treatment of global health challenges, especially for infectious diseases, to reduce the cost and difficulty of treating chronic indications, and to prolong local delivery in difficult to administer parts of the body. These products will help improve patient safety, adherence, and comfort.

Hormonal Contraceptives and Dermatology

Hormones play a significant role in normal skin physiology and many dermatologic conditions. As contraceptives and hormonal therapies continue to advance and increase in popularity, it is important for dermatologists to understand their mechanisms and dermatologic effects given the intricate interplay between hormones and the skin. This article reviews the dermatologic effects, both adverse and beneficial, of combined oral contraceptives (COCs), hormonal intrauterine devices (IUDs), implants, injections, and vaginal rings. Overall, the literature suggests that progesterone-only methods, such as implants and hormonal IUDs, tend to trigger or worsen many conditions, including acne, hirsutism, alopecia, and even rosacea. Therefore, it is worthwhile to obtain detailed medication and contraceptive histories on patients with these conditions. There is sufficient evidence that hormonal contraceptives, particularly COCs and vaginal rings, may effectively treat acne and hirsutism. While there are less data to support the role of hormonal contraceptives in other dermatologic disorders, they demonstrate potential in improving androgenetic alopecia and hidradenitis suppurativa.

Immediate versus delayed postpartum insertion of contraceptive implant for contraception

BACKGROUND

The spacing of pregnancies has a positive impact on maternal and newborn health. The progestin contraceptive implant, which is a long-acting, reversible method of contraception, has a well-established low failure rate that is compatible with tubal sterilization. The standard provision of contraceptive methods on the first postpartum visit may put some women at risk of unintended pregnancy, either due to loss to follow-up or having sexual intercourse prior to receiving contraception. Therefore, the immediate administration of contraception prior to discharge from the hospital that has high efficacy may improve contraceptive prevalence and prevent unintended pregnancy.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the initiation rate, effectiveness, and side effects of immediate versus delayed postpartum insertion of implant for contraception.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for eligible studies up to 28 October 2016 in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and POPLINE. We examined review articles and contacted investigators. We also checked registers of ongoing clinical trials, citation lists of included studies, key textbooks, grey literature, and previous systematic reviews for potentially relevant studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We sought randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared immediate postpartum versus delayed insertion of contraceptive implant for contraception.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors (JS, YW) independently screened titles and abstracts of the search results, and assessed the full-text articles of potentially relevant studies for inclusion. They extracted data from the included studies, assessed risk of bias, compared results, and resolved disagreements by consulting a third review author (PL or SK). We contacted investigators for additional data, where possible. We computed the Mantel-Haenszel risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for binary outcomes and the mean difference (MD) with 95% CI for continuous variables.

MAIN RESULTS

Three studies that included 410 participants met the inclusion criteria of the review. We did not identify any ongoing trials. Two included studies were at low risk of selection, attrition, and reporting biases, but were at high risk of performance and detection biases due to the inability to blind participants to the intervention. One included study was at high risk of attrition bias. The overall quality of the evidence for each comparison ranged from very low to moderate; the main limitations were risk of bias and imprecision.Initiation rate of contraceptive implants at the first postpartum check-up visit was significantly higher in the immediate insertion group than in the delayed insertion group (RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.28 to 1.55; three studies, 410 participants; moderate quality evidence).There appeared to be little or no difference between the groups in the continuation rate of contraceptive implant used at six months after insertion (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.11; two studies, 125 participants; low quality evidence) or at 12 months after insertion (RR 1.04; 95% CI 0.81 to 1.34; one study, 64 participants;very low quality evidence)Women who received an immediate postpartum contraceptive implant insertion had a higher mean number of days of abnormal vaginal bleeding within six weeks postpartum (MD 5.80 days, 95% CI 3.79 to 7.81; one study, 215 participants; low quality evidence) and a higher rate of other side effects in the first six weeks after birth (RR 2.06, 95% CI 1.38 to 3.06; one study, 215 participants; low quality evidence) than those who received a delayed postpartum insertion. There appeared to be little or no difference between the groups in heavy, irregular vaginal bleeding or associated severe cramping within 12 months (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.44, one study, 64 participants;very low quality evidence).It was unclear whether there was any difference between the groups in scores for participant satisfaction on a 0-10 scale (MD -0.40, 95% CI -1.26 to 0.46, low quality evidence), or in rates of unintended pregnancy (RR 1.82, 95% CI 0.38 to 8.71, 1 RCT, 64 women, very low quality evidence) at 12 months, or in rate of breastfeeding rate at six months (RR 2.01, 95% CI 0.72 ro 5.63, 1 RCT, 64 women, very low quality evidence) rate did not differ significantly between the groups.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence from this review indicates that the rate of initiation of contraceptive implant at the first postpartum check-up visit was higher with immediate postpartum insertion than with delayed insertion. There appeared to be little or no difference between the groups in the continuation rate of contraceptive implant use at 6 months. It was unclear whether there was any difference between the groups in continuation of contraceptive use at 12 months or in the unintended pregnancy rate at 12 months.

Cost-Effectiveness of Immediate Compared With Delayed Postpartum Etonogestrel Implant Insertion

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of immediate compared with delayed (6 weeks) postpartum etonogestrel implant insertion in preventing future unintended pregnancy.

METHODS

We constructed a decision-analytic model to examine a hypothetical population of women who request a contraceptive implant after giving birth. The timeframe for analysis was from the time of childbirth to 1 year postpartum. Model inputs were derived from a comprehensive literature review. We compared immediate (before discharge from the childbirth hospital stay) compared with delayed (at first postpartum office visit) postpartum placement of the contraceptive implant from a health care system's perspective. Implant insertion and removal, loss to follow-up at the postpartum visit, use of alternative contraceptive methods, and contraceptive failure were incorporated into the model. We calculated the incremental cost of immediate insertion for each pregnancy prevented during the first postpartum year and cost savings associated with pregnancies prevented. One-way sensitivity analyses were also performed. Cost estimates are reported in 2014 U.S. dollars.

RESULTS

Immediate postpartum implant insertion is associated with higher expected cost than delayed insertion ($1,091/patient compared with $650/patient) but is more effective in preventing pregnancies (expected pregnancy rate: 2.4% and 21.6%, respectively). This results in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $2,304 per pregnancy prevented. When taking into consideration medical costs of the resulting unintended pregnancies that could be avoided, immediate implant insertion is expected to save $1,263 per patient.

CONCLUSION

Immediate postpartum provision of the contraceptive implant is cost-effective in preventing unintended pregnancies and should be provided to women requesting this form of contraception.

The effect of immediate postpartum compared to delayed postpartum and interval etonogestrel contraceptive implant insertion on removal rates for bleeding

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether the discontinuation rate of the etonogestrel contraceptive implant due to irregular vaginal bleeding among women with immediate postpartum insertion is increased compared to delayed postpartum and interval placement.

STUDY DESIGN

This retrospective cohort study compared women who underwent immediate postpartum etonogestrel contraceptive implant insertion (within 96 h of delivery) to delayed postpartum (6 to 12 weeks postpartum) and interval insertion between January 2008 and December 2010. Charts were reviewed for date and reason for removal. A chi-squared test was used to compare discontinuation due to bleeding between cohorts. Baseline characteristics predictive of implant removal were evaluated by simple logistic regression.

RESULTS

There were 259 women in the immediate postpartum group, 49 in the delayed postpartum group and 106 in the interval group. Average age at insertion was 22.6 (±5.5) years. Overall, 19.3% of women in the immediate postpartum group requested removal due to irregular bleeding compared to 18.4% in the delayed postpartum group [odds ratio (OR) 1.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.48-2.33] and 20.8% in the interval group (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.52-1.60). There was no difference between groups in premature removal rates for any side effect. There were no sociodemographic or clinical characteristics predictive of removal in any group.

CONCLUSION

One-fifth of etonogestrel contraceptive implant users requested premature removal due to irregular bleeding. Immediate postpartum implant insertion does not lead to increased removal rates and may help reduce unintended pregnancy. Mechanisms to help women manage irregular bleeding due to the implant are needed.

IMPLICATIONS

Immediate postpartum insertion of the etonogestrel contraceptive implant does not lead to increased removal rates due to vaginal bleeding compared to delayed postpartum or interval insertion. Immediate postpartum implant insertion may increase uptake of long-acting reversible contraception and help reduce short interpregnancy intervals and unintended pregnancy.

Lactogenesis after early postpartum use of the contraceptive implant: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate lactogenesis after early postpartum insertion of the etonogestrel contraceptive implant.

METHODS

Healthy peripartum women with healthy, term newborns who desired the etonogestrel implant for contraception were randomly assigned to early (1-3 days) or standard (4-8 weeks) postpartum insertion. The primary outcomes, time to lactogenesis stage II and lactation failure, were documented by a validated measure. The noninferiority margin for the mean difference in time to lactogenesis stage II was defined as 8 additional hours. Secondary data (device continuation and contraceptive use, breast milk analysis, supplementation rates, side effects, and bleeding patterns) were collected at periodic intervals for 6 months.

RESULTS

Sixty-nine women were enrolled. Thirty-five were randomly assigned to early insertion and 34 to standard insertion. There were no statistically significant differences between the groups in age, race, parity, mode of delivery, use of anesthesia, or prior breastfeeding experience. Early insertion was demonstrated to be noninferior to standard insertion in time to lactogenesis stage II (early: [mean±standard deviation] 64.3±19.6 hours; standard: 65.2±18.5 hours, mean difference, -1.4 hours, 95% confidence interval [CI] -10.6 to 7.7 hours). Early insertion was also demonstrated to be noninferior to standard insertion in incidence of lactation failure (1/34 [3%] in the early insertion group, 0/35 [0%] in the standard insertion group [risk difference, 0.03, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.08]). Use of formula supplementation was not significantly different between the groups. Milk composition at 6 weeks was not significantly different between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Breastfeeding outcomes were similar in women who underwent early compared with standard postpartum insertion of the etonogestrel implant.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00847587.

Safety of the etonogestrel-releasing implant during the immediate postpartum period: a pilot study

BACKGROUND

The effects of etonogestrel (ETG)-releasing contraceptive implant during the immediate postpartum period on maternal safety are unknown.

STUDY DESIGN

Forty healthy women exclusively breastfeeding were randomized to receive either ETG-releasing implant 24-48 h after delivery (n=20) or depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA group; n=20) at the sixth week postpartum. We measured blood pressure, maternal and neonatal weight, body mass index (BMI; kg/m(2)), waist circumference (WC), complete blood count, C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, tumor necrosis factor (TNF-alpha), lipid profile, fasting serum glucose and maintenance of exclusive lactation up to the 12th week postpartum.

RESULTS

Decreases in mean maternal weight, BMI (kg/m(2)) and WC were significantly greater in the ETG-releasing implant group than in the DMPA group during the first 6 weeks postpartum (-4.64+/-2.71 kg vs. -2.6+/-2.45 kg mean+/-SD, p=.017; -1.77+/-1.06 kg/m(2) vs. -0.97+/-0.95 kg/m(2), p=.026; -15.3+/-6.72 cm vs. -9.05+/-5.84 cm, p=.003, respectively). In addition, total cholesterol and HDL, were lower in DMPA users, and TNF-alpha and leukocytes were higher in DMPA users compared to in the implant group, between 6 and 12 weeks after delivery. The newborns of implant users showed a trend towards gaining more weight, as compared with the infants of the DMPA mothers during the first 6 weeks of life (implant group: +1460.50+/-621.34 g vs. DMPA group: +1035.0+/-562.43 g, p=.05). The remaining variables, including the duration of exclusive breastfeeding, were similar between the groups.

CONCLUSION

The insertion of ETG-releasing contraceptive implant during the immediate postpartum period was not associated with deleterious maternal clinical effects or with significant maternal metabolic alterations or decreased infant weight gain.

Systematic review of the literature on postpartum care: selected contraception methods, postpartum Papanicolaou test, and rubella immunization

BACKGROUND

The postpartum period is a time when many routine interventions are provided to mothers. This review examined the published evidence for the effectiveness of selected contraceptive methods, Papanicolaou (Pap) tests, and rubella immunization.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Cinahl, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials of interventions initiated from immediately after birth to 1 year in postnatal women. The initial literature search was done in 1999, and was enhanced in 2003. Studies were categorized and reviewed by topic areas. Data were extracted in a systematic method, and the quality of each study was reviewed.

RESULTS

In the 1999 search, 140 studies were randomized controlled trials that met the selection criteria: 5 related to postpartum contraception, 1 to timing of the postpartum Pap test, and 2 to postpartum rubella immunization. In the 2003 searches, 1 additional study related to postpartum contraception was identified. From the published literature on selected contraceptive methods, the intrauterine devices examined were effective in preventing pregnancy and had comparable side effect profiles. No clear recommendation can be made because insertion timing was not randomized in the included trials. Although delaying the postpartum Pap smear until 8 weeks reduces the proportion of inflammatory smears, it is uncertain whether a Pap smear is of benefit to postpartum women. The RA 27/3 postpartum rubella vaccine appears to be more effective than the Cendehill vaccine, but a small proportion of women may develop acute and chronic joint manifestations.

CONCLUSIONS

Some evidence is available to support selected postpartum contraceptive methods and the postpartum rubella vaccine, but data are lacking on the effectiveness and optimal timing of the postpartum Pap smear.

Impact of early postpartum administration of progestin-only hormonal contraceptives compared with nonhormonal contraceptives on short-term breast-feeding patterns

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to identify the impact on breast-feeding patterns of early postpartum initiation of progestin-only birth control methods compared with nonhormonal methods.

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective, nonrandomized trial was performed comparing progestin-only contraceptive methods administered before hospital discharge with nonhormonal methods on breast-feeding continuation rates, exclusive breast-feeding, and supplementation at 2, 4, and 6 weeks after delivery.

RESULTS

Three hundred nineteen women provided complete data until hospital discharge. The hormonal group had higher risk factors for not breast-feeding, but there was no difference among any of the subgroups in breast-feeding continuation rates except at week 4. Supplementation or perception of insufficient milk production did not differ between groups. By week 6, 23.5% of women discontinued breast-feeding, and 64.5% of those breast-feeding were supplementing.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that there is no detectable adverse impact on breast-feeding attributable to progestin-only contraceptive methods initiated within the first 3 days post partum.

Use of Norplant implants in the immediate postpartum period among asymptomatic HIV-1-positive mothers

A prospective cohort study of Norplant use in the immediate postpartum period among asymptomatic HIV-1-positive women was conducted in Bangkok, Thailand. The objectives of this study were to evaluate side effects and menstrual patterns of the Norplant system in this group. A total of 88 asymptomatic HIV-1-positive mothers were recruited for this study. All of them voluntarily accepted the use of the Norplant implant as a contraceptive method immediately postpartum. Their mean age was 24.9 years. Most of them had completed primary school. The follow-up period was 24 weeks. There were eight participants lost from the study because of loss of contact. Irregular bleeding was the most common menstrual pattern in these participants. The major side effects were headache, followed by hair loss. No subject terminated Norplant use during the study period. The Norplant implant appears to be safe and well tolerated in asymptomatic HIV-1-positive parturients when inserted immediately postpartum.

Implantable contraception

Although levonorgestrel contraceptive implants have been available for over 15 years, innovations have only recently led to a wider choice. These new implants offer easier insertion and removal and other advantages depending on the type of progestin. Implants prevent pregnancy by several mechanisms, including inhibition of ovulation and luteal function and alteration of cervical mucus and the endometrium. The high efficacy and ease of maintenance make implants an ideal contraceptive for many women, including adolescents, a population that uses implants infrequently but reports high satisfaction. Implants are appropriate for women who are breastfeeding, who have contraindications to estrogen, or who have diseases such as diabetes, hypertension, sickle cell anemia, or an HIV infection because implants have few metabolic or hematologic effects. Long-term use has not been associated with a decrease in BMD and generally leads to increased blood levels and iron stores. Women who wish to space their pregnancies appreciate the nearly immediate onset of action with insertion and the rapid termination of all effects with removal. All types of implants lead to menstrual changes and other side effects in some women. Adverse effects that occur in implant users more than the general population include headaches and acne. Women must be thoroughly counseled regarding the potential for menstrual alteration, side effects, and sexually transmitted infections if they do not use condoms. Despite their initial high cost, implants are a cost-effective method over several years, even when discontinued before the life of the implant.

Levonorgestrel subdermal implants. Contraception on trial

When they were introduced to the world market in the 1980s, levonorgestrel subdermal implants offered the promise of an exciting alternative to traditional hormonal contraception. They provide highly effective, long-acting protection from pregnancy, without the need for user compliance. Broad acceptability of the drug has been reported throughout the world. Recently, however, the implants have met with opposition. The drug is associated with a variety of adverse effects, and removal of implants can be problematic. Serious events have been reported in women using levonorgestrel subdermal implants, although causal relationships have not been demonstrated. Additionally, concerns have been raised over the potential for coercive use of the drug. Numerous law suits have been filed alleging serious problems with implants. As a result, the drug has received considerable negative media attention. Before the controversy over levonorgestrel subdermal implants erupted, contraceptive development had declined, resulting from limitations to profits and funding, legal threats, and changes in the insurance industry. The levonorgestrel subdermal implant experience may serve to accelerate this trend. While the introduction of levonorgestrel subdermal implants offered an alternative to the current array of medical contraception, its experience may serve to dampen future contraceptive development efforts. Costly litigation and much controversy involving the implants have acted to create disincentives to further research and development of new methods of medical contraception.

Use of Norplant implants in asymptomatic HIV-1 infected women

The study of Norplant implants use in HIV-1 infected women was conducted at the Family Planning Clinic, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand, from January 1993 to June 1996. The purpose of the study was to evaluate efficacy, clinical effects, side effects, and menstrual patterns of the Norplant system in HIV-1 infected acceptors. Forty one cases of asymptomatic HIV-1 positive women voluntarily participated in using Norplant implants after delivery or abortion. The mean age was 25.4 years. The most common menstrual pattern was irregular bleeding (63.4%). Mean blood pressure, body weight, and hemoglobin level were not different at insertion and at 12 months (p > 0.05). No pregnancy occurred during a 12-month period. It was concluded that the Norplant system was safe, efficacious, and well tolerated in HIV-1 positive women and is an appropriate contraception in these women.