Randomised controlled trial of prophylactic antibiotics before insertion of intrauterine devices. IUD Study Group

[Follow-up and counselling after pelvic inflammatory disease: CNGOF and SPILF Pelvic Inflammatory Diseases Guidelines]

OBJECTIVES

To determine the procedures for follow-up and counselling of patients after pelvic inflammatory disease (PID).

METHODS

A search in the Cochrane database, PubMed, and Google was performed using keywords related to follow-up and PID to identify reports published between 1990 and 2018. All studies published in French and English relevant to the areas of focus were included. A level of evidence (LE) based on the quality of the data available was applied for each area of focus and used for the guidelines.

RESULTS

The rate of recurrent PID is 15 to 21%. They are related to a recurrent sexually transmitted infection (STI) in 20 to 34% of cases. Recurrence PID increase the risk of infertility and chronic pelvic pain (LE2). Follow-up is recommended after PID (grade C). The rate of patients lost to follow-up is around 40%. Follow-up is improved by personalized text message reminders (grade B). Vaginal sampling for detection of N. gonorrhoeae, C. trachomatis, (and M. genitalium) by nucleic acid amplification techniques is recommended 3 to 6 months after treatment of PID associated with STI to rule out possible reinfections (grade C). The use of condoms after PID associated with STI is recommended to reduce the risk of recurrences (grade C). The systematic use of contraceptive pills after PID is not recommended to prevent subsequent infertility and chronic pelvic pain. Vaginal sampling for microbiological diagnosis is recommended before the insertion of an intrauterine device (grade B). The risk of ectopic pregnancy is high in these women and must be kept in mind.

CONCLUSION

Patient counselling and microbiological testing after PID decrease the risk of STI and thus the recurrence of PID.

Adverse events in people taking macrolide antibiotics versus placebo for any indication

BACKGROUND

Macrolide antibiotics (macrolides) are among the most commonly prescribed antibiotics worldwide and are used for a wide range of infections. However, macrolides also expose people to the risk of adverse events. The current understanding of adverse events is mostly derived from observational studies, which are subject to bias because it is hard to distinguish events caused by antibiotics from events caused by the diseases being treated. Because adverse events are treatment-specific, rather than disease-specific, it is possible to increase the number of adverse events available for analysis by combining randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of the same treatment across different diseases.

OBJECTIVES

To quantify the incidences of reported adverse events in people taking macrolide antibiotics compared to placebo for any indication.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), which includes the Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections Group Specialised Register (2018, Issue 4); MEDLINE (Ovid, from 1946 to 8 May 2018); Embase (from 2010 to 8 May 2018); CINAHL (from 1981 to 8 May 2018); LILACS (from 1982 to 8 May 2018); and Web of Science (from 1955 to 8 May 2018). We searched clinical trial registries for current and completed trials (9 May 2018) and checked the reference lists of included studies and of previous Cochrane Reviews on macrolides.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs that compared a macrolide antibiotic to placebo for any indication. We included trials using any of the four most commonly used macrolide antibiotics: azithromycin, clarithromycin, erythromycin, or roxithromycin. Macrolides could be administered by any route. Concomitant medications were permitted provided they were equally available to both treatment and comparison groups.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted and collected data. We assessed the risk of bias of all included studies and the quality of evidence for each outcome of interest. We analysed specific adverse events, deaths, and subsequent carriage of macrolide-resistant bacteria separately. The study participant was the unit of analysis for each adverse event. Any specific adverse events that occurred in 5% or more of any group were reported. We undertook a meta-analysis when three or more included studies reported a specific adverse event.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 183 studies with a total of 252,886 participants (range 40 to 190,238). The indications for macrolide antibiotics varied greatly, with most studies using macrolides for the treatment or prevention of either acute respiratory tract infections, cardiovascular diseases, chronic respiratory diseases, gastrointestinal conditions, or urogynaecological problems. Most trials were conducted in secondary care settings. Azithromycin and erythromycin were more commonly studied than clarithromycin and roxithromycin.Most studies (89%) reported some adverse events or at least stated that no adverse events were observed.Gastrointestinal adverse events were the most commonly reported type of adverse event. Compared to placebo, macrolides caused more diarrhoea (odds ratio (OR) 1.70, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.34 to 2.16; low-quality evidence); more abdominal pain (OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.22 to 2.26; low-quality evidence); and more nausea (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.37 to 1.90; moderate-quality evidence). Vomiting (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.56; moderate-quality evidence) and gastrointestinal disorders not otherwise specified (NOS) (OR 2.16, 95% CI 1.56 to 3.00; moderate-quality evidence) were also reported more often in participants taking macrolides compared to placebo.The number of additional people (absolute difference in risk) who experienced adverse events from macrolides was: gastrointestinal disorders NOS 85/1000; diarrhoea 72/1000; abdominal pain 62/1000; nausea 47/1000; and vomiting 23/1000.The number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) ranged from 12 (95% CI 8 to 23) for gastrointestinal disorders NOS to 17 (9 to 47) for abdominal pain; 19 (12 to 33) for diarrhoea; 19 (13 to 30) for nausea; and 45 (22 to 295) for vomiting.There was no clear consistent difference in gastrointestinal adverse events between different types of macrolides or route of administration.Taste disturbances were reported more often by participants taking macrolide antibiotics, although there were wide confidence intervals and moderate heterogeneity (OR 4.95, 95% CI 1.64 to 14.93; I² = 46%; low-quality evidence).Compared with participants taking placebo, those taking macrolides experienced hearing loss more often, however only four studies reported this outcome (OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.70; I² = 0%; low-quality evidence).We did not find any evidence that macrolides caused more cardiac disorders (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.40; very low-quality evidence); hepatobiliary disorders (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.27 to 4.09; very low-quality evidence); or changes in liver enzymes (OR 1.56, 95% CI 0.73 to 3.37; very low-quality evidence) compared to placebo.We did not find any evidence that appetite loss, dizziness, headache, respiratory symptoms, blood infections, skin and soft tissue infections, itching, or rashes were reported more often by participants treated with macrolides compared to placebo.Macrolides caused less cough (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.80; moderate-quality evidence) and fewer respiratory tract infections (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.80; moderate-quality evidence) compared to placebo, probably because these are not adverse events, but rather characteristics of the indications for the antibiotics. Less fever (OR 0.73, 95% 0.54 to 1.00; moderate-quality evidence) was also reported by participants taking macrolides compared to placebo, although these findings were non-significant.There was no increase in mortality in participants taking macrolides compared with placebo (OR 0.96, 95% 0.87 to 1.06; I² = 11%; low-quality evidence).Only 24 studies (13%) provided useful data on macrolide-resistant bacteria. Macrolide-resistant bacteria were more commonly identified among participants immediately after exposure to the antibiotic. However, differences in resistance thereafter were inconsistent.Pharmaceutical companies supplied the trial medication or funding, or both, for 91 trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The macrolides as a group clearly increased rates of gastrointestinal adverse events. Most trials made at least some statement about adverse events, such as "none were observed". However, few trials clearly listed adverse events as outcomes, reported on the methods used for eliciting adverse events, or even detailed the numbers of people who experienced adverse events in both the intervention and placebo group. This was especially true for the adverse event of bacterial resistance.

[Intrauterine contraception: CNGOF Contraception Guidelines]

OBJECTIVE

To provide national clinical guidelines focusing on intrauterine contraception.

METHODS

A systematic review of available literature was performed using Pubmed and Cochrane libraries. American, British and Canadian guidelines were considered as well.

RESULTS

Intrauterine contraception (IUC) displays a wide panel of indications, including adolescents, nulliparous, patients living with HIV before AIDS (Grade B) and women with history of ectopic pregnancy (Grade C). Cervical cancer screening should not be modified in women with IUC (Grade B). Bimanual examination and cervix inspection are mandatory before device insertion (Grade B). Patients should not systematically undergo screening for sexually transmitted infections (STI) before device insertion (Grade B). Screening for STI should be preferably done before insertion but it can be performed at the time of device insertion in asymptomatic women (Grade B). Routine antibiotic prophylaxis and premedication are not recommended before insertion (Grade A). A follow-up visit may be offered several weeks after insertion (Professional consensus). Routine pelvic ultrasound examination in not recommended after device insertion (Grade B). In patients with IUC, unscheduled bleeding, when persistent or associated with pelvic pain, requires further investigation to rule out complication (Professional agreement). Suspected uterine perforation warrants radiological workup to locate the device (Professional consensus). Laparoscopic approach should be preferred for elective removal of intrauterine device from abdominal cavity (Professional consensus). In case of accidental pregnancy with intrauterine device in situ, ectopic pregnancy should be excluded (Grade B). In case of viable and desired intrauterine pregnancy, intrauterine device removal is recommended if the strings are reachable (Grade C). Detection of Actinomyces-like organisms on pap smear in asymptomatic patients with intrauterine contraception does not require further intervention (Grade B). Immediate removal of intrauterine device is not recommended in case of STI or pelvic inflammatory disease (Grade B). Device removal should be considered in the absence of clinical improvement after 48 to 72 hours of appropriate treatment (Grade B).

CONCLUSION

Intrauterine contraception is a long-acting and reversible contraception method displaying great efficacy and high continuation rate. In contrast, complication rate is low. It should thus be offered to both nulliparous and multiparous women.

A prospective assessment of pelvic infection risk following same-day sexually transmitted infection testing and levonorgestrel intrauterine system placement

BACKGROUND

Misperceptions persist that intrauterine device placement is related to pelvic infections and Chlamydia and gonorrhea testing results are needed prior to placement.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to evaluate the relationship of Chlamydia and gonorrhea screening to pelvic infection for up to 2 years following placement of the levonorgestrel 52-mg intrauterine system.

STUDY DESIGN

A total of 1751 nulliparous and multiparous females 16 to 45 years old enrolled in a multicenter trial designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a new levonorgestrel intrauterine system for up to 7 years. Participants had Chlamydia screening at study entry and yearly if they were age ≤25 years. Women also had baseline gonorrhea screening if testing had not been performed since starting their current sexual relationship. Those who changed sexual partners during the trial had repeated Chlamydia and gonorrhea testing. Intrauterine system insertion could occur on the same day as screening. Participants did not receive prophylactic antibiotics for intrauterine system placement. Investigators performed pelvic examinations after 12 and 24 months and when clinically indicated during visits at 3, 6, and 18 months after placement and unscheduled visits. Pelvic infection included any clinical diagnosis of pelvic inflammatory disease or endometritis.

RESULTS

Most participants (n = 1364, 79.6%) did not have sexually transmitted infection test results available prior to intrauterine system placement. In all, 29 (1.7%) participants had positive baseline testing for a sexually transmitted infection (Chlamydia, n = 25; gonorrhea, n = 3; both, n = 1); 6 of these participants had known results (all with Chlamydia infection) prior to intrauterine system placement and received treatment before enrollment. The 23 participants whose results were not known at the time of intrauterine system placement received treatment without intrauterine system removal and none developed pelvic infection. The incidence of positive Chlamydia testing was similar among those with and without known test results at the time of intrauterine system placement (1.9% vs 1.5%, respectively, P = .6). Nine (0.5%) participants had a diagnosis of pelvic infection over 2 years after placement, all of whom had negative Chlamydia screening on the day of or within 1 month after intrauterine system placement. Infections were diagnosed in 3 participants within 7 days, 1 at 39 days, and 5 at ≥6 months. Seven participants received outpatient antibiotic treatment and 2 (diagnoses between 6-12 months after placement) received inpatient treatment. Two (0.1%) participants had intrauterine system removal related to infection (at 6 days and at 7 months after placement), both of whom only required outpatient treatment.

CONCLUSION

Conducting Chlamydia and gonorrhea testing on the same day as intrauterine system placement is associated with a low risk of pelvic infection (0.2%). Over the first 2 years of intrauterine system use, infections are infrequent and not temporally related to intrauterine system placement. Pelvic infection can be successfully treated in most women with outpatient antibiotics and typically does not require intrauterine system removal. Women without clinical evidence of active infection can have intrauterine system placement and sexually transmitted infection screening, if indicated, on the same day.

Clinical versus laboratory screening for sexually transmitted infections prior to insertion of intrauterine contraception among women living with HIV/AIDS: a randomized controlled trial

STUDY QUESTION

Does laboratory testing after syndromic screening for sexually transmitted infections (STIs) reduce the rate of intrauterine contraception (IUC) removal among women living with HIV/AIDS (WLHA)?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Additional laboratory testing after syndromic screening for STIs did not affect the likelihood that a woman would remove an IUC immediately or within 1 year of IUC use or the frequency of post-insertion unscheduled clinic visits. In low-risk WLHA, the incidence rate of IUC removal is low with or without laboratory testing.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Fear of infectious morbidity remains an obstacle to uptake of IUC by WLHA. The value of laboratory testing after syndromic screening for STI before the insertion of IUC remains uncertain.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

We enrolled WLHA from 2 September to 6 December 2013 and followed them up to 31 December 2014. After syndromic screening, 703 women free of STIs were randomized to either additional laboratory screening or no additional screening for STI before IUC insertion. The randomization sequence was generated by an independent statistician and randomization numbers placed in opaque sequentially numbered sealed envelopes. All women randomized had an IUC inserted and in all 672 participants completed the 1-year follow-up. The study staff who followed up the participants were blinded to the study allocation groups. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) were used to compare the incidence rates of IUC removal, unscheduled clinic attendance and IUC continuation between the two groups.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Women eligible to participate were 18-49 years old at study entry, in a relationship with a male partner, wanted to avoid pregnancy for at least 1 year and were undergoing HIV/AIDS care at Mulago Hospital, Uganda. Participants completed a baseline questionnaire and up to four follow-up questionnaires until discontinuation of IUC, loss to follow-up or end of study observation after 12 months.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

The rate of IUC removal was 8.8% (29/331) in the no additional screening group and 8.0% (27/341) in the additional laboratory screening group [IRR 1.1 (95% CI 0.63-1.93)]. Unscheduled clinic attendances were similar in the two groups at 1 year of IUC insertion: 13.6% (45/331) in the no additional screening group and 12.3% (42/241) in the additional laboratory screening group. During the 1-year follow-up, only five women, three from the no additional screening group and two from the additional laboratory screening group, developed pelvic inflammatory disease (PID), as defined by established diagnostic criteria.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

We were not able to carry out STI risk assessment directly from the men thus women with high-risk partners could have been included in the study and this may be responsible for the lack of a demonstrable effect of additional laboratory screening on incidence rates of IUC removals and unscheduled clinic attendance. The diagnosis of PID was based on clinical signs and symptoms; therefore, subclinical PID could have been missed.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

Among WLHA, the incidence rate of IUC removal is low and IUC continuation high. Syndromic screening for STIs could be sufficient in indentifying WLHA who are suitable for IUC use. However, our findings are only generalizable to women in HIV/AIDS care who have access to good follow-up.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS

The study was supported by Medical Education for Equitable Services to all Ugandans, a Medical Education Partnership Initiative grant number 5R24TW008886 from the office of Global AIDS Coordinator and the US Department of Health and Human Services, Health Resources and Services Administration and National Institutes of Health. Additional funding was from the Swedish International Development Agency, Swedish Research Council (SIDA/VR). The authors have no competing interests to declare.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

This trial was registered at Pan African Clinical Trial, Registry. PACTR 201308000561212.

Contraception for Adolescents: Focusing on Long-Acting Reversible Contraceptives (LARC) to Improve Reproductive Health Outcomes

Adolescent pregnancy rates in the U.S. have reached an all-time low from their peak in the 1980s and 1990s. However, the U.S. maintains the highest rate of teenage pregnancy among developed nations. Adolescents experience higher typical use failure rates for user-dependent contraceptives compared to their adult counterparts. Long-acting reversible contraception (LARC), IUDs and implants, have failure rates that are both very low and independent of user age. In settings where the most effective methods are prioritized and access barriers are removed, the majority of adolescents initiate LARC. Use of LARC by adolescents significantly reduces rates of overall and repeat teen pregnancy. All methods of contraception are safe for use in teens, including IUDs and DMPA. Dual use of LARC and barrier methods to reduce risk of sexually transmitted infection, is the optimal contraceptive strategy for most adolescents. Adolescent access to evidence-based and confidential contraceptive services, provided in a manner that respects autonomy, is a vital public health goal.

Immediate postabortal insertion of intrauterine devices

Background The use of an effective contraceptive may be necessary after an abortion. Insertion of an intrauterine device (IUD) may be done the same day or later. Immediate IUD insertion is an option since the woman is not pregnant, pain of insertion is less because the cervical os is open, and her motivation to use contraception may be high. However, insertion of an IUD immediately after a pregnancy ends carries risks, such as spontaneous expulsion.Objectives To assess the safety and efficacy of IUD insertion immediately after spontaneous or induced abortion.Search methods We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, POPLINE, ClinicalTrials.gov,and ICTRP in January 27, 2014. We also contacted investigators to identify other trials.Selection criteria We sought all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with at least one treatment arm that involved IUD insertion immediately after an induced abortion or after curettage for spontaneous abortion.Data collection and analysis We evaluated the methodological quality of each report and abstracted the data. We focused on discontinuation rates for accidental pregnancy, perforation, expulsion, and pelvic inflammatory disease.We computed the weighted average of the rate ratios.We compute drisk ratios (RRs) with 95% Confidence Intervals (CIs).We performed an intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis by including all randomised participants in the analysis according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.Main results We identified 12 trials most of which are of moderate risk of bias involving 7,119 participants which described random assignment.Five trials randomised to either immediate or delayed insertion of IUD. One of them randomised to immediate versus delayed insertion of Copper 7 showed immediate insertion of the Copper 7 was associated with a higher risk of expulsion than was delayed insertion(RR 11.98, 95% CI 1.61 to 89.35,1 study, 259 participants); the quality of evidence was moderate. Moderate quality of evidence also suggests that use and expulsion of levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system or CuT380A was more likely for immediate compared to delayed insertion risk ratio (RR) 1.40 (95% CI 1.24 to 1.58; 3 studies; 878 participants) and RR 2.64 ( 95% CI 1.16 to 6.00; 3 studies; 878 participants) respectively. Another trial randomised to the levonorgestrel IUD or Nova T showed discontinuation rates due to pregnancy were likely to be higher for women in the Nova T group. (MD 8.70, 95% CI 3.92 to 13.48;1 study; 438 participants);moderate quality evidence.Seven trials examined immediate insertion of IUD only. From meta-analysis of two multicentre trials, pregnancy was less likely for the TCu 220C versus the Lippes Loop (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.75; 2 studies; 2257 participants ) as was expulsion (RR 0.61, 95% CI0.46 to 0.81; 2 studies; 2257 participants). Estimates for the TCu 220 versus the Copper 7 were RR 0.42 ( 95% CI 0.23 to 0.77; 2 studies, 2,274 participants) and RR 0.68, (95% CI 0.51 to 0.91); 2 studies, 2,274 participants), respectively. In other work, adding copper sleeves to the Lippes Loop improved efficacy (RR 3.40, 95% CI 1.28 to 9.04, 1 study, 400 participants) and reduced expulsion(RR 3.00, 95% CI 1.51 to 5.97; 1 study, 400 participants).Authors' conclusions Moderate quality evidence shows that insertion of an IUD immediately after abortion is safe and practical. IUD expulsion rates appear higher immediately after abortions compared to delayed insertions. However, at six months postabortion, IUD use is higher following immediate insertion compared to delayed insertion.

Pitfalls of research linking the intrauterine device to pelvic inflammatory disease

Correctly diagnosing pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) using noninvasive clinical criteria remains challenging. Current guidelines for initiating treatment, based on minimal criteria (sensitive but not specific), are justified for public health purposes but inadequate and misleading for scientific purposes. Previous research on the link between the intrauterine device (IUD) and PID was controversial and subject to many limitations. Even today, these limitations still exist and include uncertainty of the PID diagnosis, unfair contraceptive comparisons, selection and diagnostic bias, and confounding. For example, IUD users are on heightened alert for PID relative to users of other methods. In addition, IUD users with pelvic pain may be more likely to seek physician consultation and consequently receive a PID diagnosis (true-positive or false-positive). Confounding factors such as higher coital frequency, multiple sexual partners, and low condom use may explain any finding that shows a higher PID rate among IUD users compared with other contraceptive users. Good evidence on how or whether the IUD changes the etiology of PID is lacking. In the past 10 years, use of the intrauterine device in the United States has increased markedly. Thus today, researchers may now have sufficient population-level exposure (IUD use) and disease (PID) to search for a connection and repeat past mistakes. Any new findings using observational research should be interpreted with caution. More rigorous research designs may not be pragmatic or feasible.

Myths and misconceptions about long-acting reversible contraception (LARC)

PURPOSE

To discuss common myths and misconceptions about long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) among patients and health care providers.

METHODS

We address some of these common myths in an effort to provide clinicians with accurate information to discuss options with patients, parents, and referring providers. The list of myths was created through an informal survey of an online listserv of 200 family planning experts and from the experiences of the authors.

RESULTS

When presented with information about LARC, adolescents are more likely to request LARC and are satisfied with LARC. Clinicians have an important role in counseling about and providing LARC to their adolescent patients as well as supporting them in managing associated side effects.

CONCLUSIONS

This review article can be used as a resource for contraceptive counseling visits and for the continuing education of health professionals providing adolescent reproductive health care.

A review of barriers and myths preventing the more widespread use of intrauterine contraception in nulliparous women

Objectives Intrauterine contracepives (IUCs) are highly effective and safe for use in all women, including those who are nulliparous. However, many myths and barriers prevent more widespread utilisation. The objective of this article was to explore the health care provider (HCP), health system and user issues that prevent more widespread use of IUCs, particularly among nulliparous women, and to present the evidence that supports achieving greater utilisation of these devices.

Methods MEDLINE, PubMed and Embase were used to identify studies reporting attitudes and beliefs around IUCs, and clinical studies providing evidence of their risks and benefits.

Results HCP, health system and user factors limiting use of IUCs were identified. The most widely explored barriers in published studies are those at the HCP level. User barriers are less well documented and health system barriers are mostly assessed through indirect evidence. Many, but not all, of the barriers can be reduced through greater understanding of the evidence.

Conclusions Efforts need to be made to disseminate the evidence, which shows that few contraindications exist to IUC use. Addressing HCP lack of knowledge, training and confidence with IUC insertions, particularly in nulliparous women, could make a substantial positive impact on IUC utilisation.

A clinical guideline for intrauterine device use in adolescents

PURPOSE

To present an evidence-based review of the data for and against the use of the intrauterine device (IUD) in adolescent females and to provide guidelines for selection of appropriate candidates.

DATA SOURCES

Clinical research, expert opinions, and systematic reviews of IUD use in adolescents.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of the IUD in adolescents has been questioned in the past as a result of concerns surrounding increased risks for pelvic inflammatory disease and infertility in adolescents. Current research reveals no contraindications to IUD use based solely on age or parity and illuminates many benefits to use, including a decrease in menorrhagia and dysmenorrhea.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

The U.S. adolescent pregnancy rates rose from 2005 to 2007, reversing a decade-long downward trend. Adolescents need safe, effective, user-friendly contraceptive methods. IUDs are a safe and effective option for adolescents and provide an additional contraceptive option for nurse practitioners to offer their patients to prevent unintended pregnancy and enhance adolescent sexual health and well-being. Proper selection of candidates for IUD use can mitigate clinical and legal risks associated with IUD use.

Efficacy and safety of long-acting reversible contraception

Long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) includes intrauterine devices (IUDs) and the subdermal implant. These methods are the most effective reversible methods of contraception, and have the additional advantages of being long-lasting, convenient, well liked by users and cost effective. Compared with other user-dependent methods that increase the risk of noncompliance-related method failure, LARC methods can bring 'typical use' failure rates more in line with 'perfect use' failure rates. LARC methods are 'forgettable'; they are not dependent on compliance with a pill-taking regimen, remembering to change a patch or ring, or coming back to the clinician for an injection. LARC method failure rates rival that of tubal sterilization at <1% for IUDs and the subdermal implant. For these reasons, we believe that IUDs and implants should be offered as first-line contraception for most women. This article provides a review of the LARC methods that are currently available in the US, including their effectiveness, advantages, disadvantages and contraindications. Additionally, we dispel myths and misconceptions regarding IUDs, and address the barriers to LARC use.

[Focus on intrauterine contraception in 15 questions and answers]

In recent years, intrauterine contraception has experienced a revival, explainable as much by the broadening of its indications as by the ever increasing demand, expressed by women, for a contraceptive method that is both reliable and not binding. In this review, we establish an up-to-date and comprehensive state of intrauterine contraception in 2010, by responding to key-questions, which arise from everyday practice in gynaecology.

An intrauterine device as a possible cause of change in the microbial flora of the female genital system

AIM

An intrauterine device (IUD), used by millions of women worldwide, is one of the most efficient methods of contraception. The goal of our study was to compare a group of women using the IUD to a control group.

MATERIAL & METHODS

The survey included 236 women of fertile age from gynaecological practices in the area of Split and Dalmatia County, Croatia. The subjects were divided into two groups: IUD users and a control group (women not using any contraception methods). Sampling, transportation, sample processing in the laboratory and interpretation of results were conducted using standard microbiological procedures and methods.

RESULTS

Opportunistic bacteria were statistically more frequently isolated among IUD users (P < 0.001). The most frequently isolated bacteria in both groups were Escherichia coli and Ureaplasma urealyticum with significantly higher rates in IUD users (P < 0.001). Both colonization and infection had higher rates in IUD users (P < 0.001). There were no significant differences either in the frequency of bacteria isolation regarding different IUD types (P = 0.93), or in relation to duration of IUD use (P = 0.67).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the data in our study IUD users have an increased chance of developing a cervical infection caused by the bacteria Escherichia coli and Ureaplasma urealyticum. Therefore, before IUD insertion women should be screened and treated for asymptomatic vaginal or cervical infections to prevent possible serious IUD-associated infections.

Long-term safety, efficacy, and patient acceptability of the intrauterine Copper T-380A contraceptive device

The intrauterine device (IUD), primarily in the form of the copper IUD, is used by more than 150 million women around the world, making it the most widely used reversible method of contraception. With a remarkably low failure rate of less than 1 per 100 women in the first year of use, the Copper T-380A is in the top tier of contraceptives in terms of efficacy. Risks of utilization include perforation and an increased risk of infection in the first 20 days following insertion. Overall, the number of adverse events is low, making the Copper T-380A a very safe contraceptive method. The most common reasons for the discontinuation of this method are menstrual bleeding and dysmenorrhea. However, cumulative discontinuation rates of Copper T-380A are lower than that have been reported for other methods, indicating that the Copper T-380A is highly acceptable to women. After 5 years, approximately 50% of all women, who have a Copper T-380A inserted, will continue to use this highly effective contraceptive method.

Immediate postabortal insertion of intrauterine devices

BACKGROUND

Insertion of an intrauterine device (IUD) immediately after an abortion has several advantages. The woman is known not to be pregnant. Many clinicians refuse to insert an IUD in a woman who is not menstruating. After induced abortion, a woman's motivation to use contraception may be high. However, insertion of an IUD immediately after a pregnancy ends carries risks, such as spontaneous expulsion due to recent cervical dilation.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the safety and efficacy of IUD insertion immediately after spontaneous or induced abortion.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched MEDLINE, CENTRAL, POPLINE, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, and ICTRP. We also contacted investigators to identify other trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We sought all randomized controlled trials with at least one treatment arm that involved IUD insertion immediately after an induced abortion or after curettage for spontaneous abortion. We identified 11 trials which described random assignment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We evaluated the methodological quality of each report and abstracted the data. We focused on discontinuation rates for accidental pregnancy, perforation, expulsion, and pelvic inflammatory disease. We computed the weighted average of the rate ratios. We computed relative risks (RR) with 95% Confidence Intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

Three trials randomized to immediate or delayed insertion. One showed no significant differences. Meta-analysis of two showed use of levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system or CuT380A was more likely for immediate versus delayed insertion (RR 1.18; 95% CI 1.08 to 1.28). Another trial randomized to the levonorgestrel IUD or Nova T; discontinuation rates due to pregnancy were 0.8 and 9.5, respectively. Sub-analysis showed higher expulsion rates for postabortal than interval insertions (levonorgestrel: 2.8 versus 6.8; Nova T: 3.0 versus 8.3).Seven trials examined immediate insertion. From meta-analysis of two multicenter trials, pregnancy was less likely for the TCu 220C versus the Lippes Loop (RR 0.38; 95% CI 0.20 to 0.72) as was expulsion (RR 0.51; 95% CI 0.30 to 0.88). Estimates for the TCu 220 versus the Copper 7 were 0.52 (95% CI 0.36 to 0.77) and 0.58 (95% CI 0.39 to 0.87), respectively. In other work, adding copper sleeves to the Lippes Loop improved efficacy (RR 3.82; 95% CI 1.41 to 10.36) and reduced expulsion (RR 3.37; 95% CI 1.65 to 6.90).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Insertion of an IUD immediately after abortion is safe and practical. IUD expulsion rates appear higher than after interval insertions. However, IUD use is higher at six months with immediate than with interval insertion.

Expanding access to intrauterine contraception

The intrauterine device is a safe, highly effective, long-lasting, yet reversible method of contraception. Expanding access to intrauterine contraception is an important measure to reduce the rate of unintended pregnancy in the United States. Clinicians should consider intrauterine contraception in appropriate candidates, including women who are nulliparous, adolescent, immediately postpartum or postabortal, and desiring emergency contraception, and as an alternative to permanent sterilization. Barriers to intrauterine contraception such as requiring cervical cancer screening before insertion, routine testing for gonorrhea and chlamydial infection in low-risk women, or scheduling insertion only during menses are unnecessary.

Hormonal contraception

Hormonal contraceptives have been a part of clinical practice for more than 40 years, and family planning programs, based largely on contraceptive provision, are regarded as one of the most successful public health interventions of the 20th century. Thus, discussion of family planning issues and contraceptive considerations has become an integral component of women's health care and one of the benchmarks of the traditional annual well-women visit. In terms of cost-effectiveness, prevention of unplanned pregnancies through contraceptive use has repeatedly been shown to be a highly cost-effective use of health care dollars. Options for effective hormonal contraception have expanded tremendously and include a variety of delivery options, including the pills both in traditional 21/7 format, and more recently in a 24/4 format, as well as a vaginal ring, a skin patch, implants, and the hormonally medicated intrauterine device. Importantly, the overall risks associated with hormonal contraceptives have been reduced as compared with older formulations, even for women with medical conditions. Many modern hormonal contraceptives also offer valuable noncontraceptive benefits. To help clinical decision making, a number of evidence-based guides have been published, and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has recently updated their practice bulletin on contraception use in women with medical conditions. In general, clinical protocols for provision of hormonal contraceptives have been streamlined, and unnecessary practices, tests, and procedures are identified and discouraged. In this review, we will summarize both technical and programmatic aspects of hormonal contraceptive use, and methods are discussed in order of efficacy from highest to lowest.

Contraception: what every internist should know

The human costs of unintended pregnancy-abortion and parenting under difficult circumstances-are high. For this reason, all physicians who treat female patients should be knowledgeable about the basics of contraception-both its practical uses and its public health impact. This knowledge will make physicians, including internists, better able to counsel and provide contraceptives for individual patients and to advocate for availability and access. This article discusses the problem and determinants of unintended pregnancy and reviews contraceptive methods.

Intrauterine contraception: the pendulum swings back

Intrauterine contraception is the most widely used method of reversible fertility regulation in the world. Finally, IUC is undergoing a renaissance in the US and it's role will expand as new devices and systems are developed and as old biases among clinicians and women are erased. Successful fertility regulation is a defining factor of the overall health of a population; the expanded use of IUC can help achieve that public health success.

Intrauterine devices — upper and lower genital tract infections

The clinical diagnosis of a pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) is notoriously difficult. The incidence rate of PIDs among intrauterine device (IUD) users as reported from different studies depends heavily on the definition used and the means available for diagnosing PIDs. It varies by almost 10-fold from 1 per 100 to 1 per 1000 woman-years in different publications. PID risk has been found to be 6-fold higher in the first month after IUD insertion than it is thereafter. It is not known if the overall PID risk in IUD users beyond the first month of IUD insertion is higher than that in nonusers; however, if it is higher, the additional risk is small. The PID risk in IUD users is modified by the number of sexual partners of the IUD user and that of her partner(s), community prevalence of STDs and age of the IUD user. Bacterial vaginosis appears not to be associated with IUD use. Overall, bacterial vaginosis is not associated with PIDs, but specific subgroups of patients with BV that may be difficult to identify clinically are at an increased risk for PIDs. Because of the long duration of use of current copper IUDs, replacement of the IUD is infrequent and insertion-associated PIDs should consequently also be less frequent. IUD use has become safer with respect to PIDs through more effective screening and counseling procedures described in current guidelines for the initiation of IUD use. Current guidance must be followed to preserve the IUD as a safe contraceptive method.

Cochrane systematic reviews of IUD trials: lessons learned

BACKGROUND

Intrauterine devices (IUDs) are the most widely used reversible contraceptives in the world today, and decisions about their use should reflect the best available evidence.

STUDY DESIGN

We performed a computer search of the Cochrane Library for all IUD-related reviews.

RESULTS

Eleven reviews related to IUDs have been registered in The Cochrane Library; 10 have been completed, and one is in progress. Topics include type of IUD, timing of insertion, clinical management, emergency contraception and use as gynecological treatment. The copper T380A is the most effective copper IUD; the levonorgestrel intrauterine system has efficacy comparable to that of IUDs with >250 mm(2) of copper. The frameless device may be comparable in efficacy to the copper T380A, although whether problems with the initial inserter are resolved is unclear. Immediate postpartum and postabortal insertion appears safe and effective, although trials comparing immediate to delayed insertions are scarce. Prophylactic antibiotics at the time of insertion appear unwarranted except in populations with a high prevalence of sexually transmitted diseases. Many nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs reduce pain and bleeding associated with IUDs, although prophylactic use of ibuprofen does not improve continuation rates. The levonorgestrel system is superior to oral progestins in treating heavy uterine bleeding. This IUD compares favorably with endometrial ablation techniques and presents an alternative to hysterectomy for many women.

DISCUSSION

Trials are needed to evaluate immediate vs. delayed insertion after delivery or abortion and to explore emerging therapeutic uses of the levonorgestrel system, such as treatment of endometrial hyperplasia.

Immediate postabortal insertion of intrauterine devices

BACKGROUND

Insertion of an intrauterine device (IUD) immediately after an abortion has several potential advantages. The woman is known not to be pregnant, a major concern for clinicians. For example, many clinicians refuse to insert an IUD in a woman who is not menstruating. After induced abortion, a woman's motivation to use contraception may be high. However, insertion of an IUD immediately after a pregnancy ends carries potential risks as well. For example, the risk of spontaneous expulsion may be increased due to recent cervical dilation.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the safety and efficacy of IUD insertion immediately after spontaneous or induced abortion.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We used MEDLINE, Popline, and EMBASE computer searches, supplemented by review articles and contacts with investigators.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We sought all randomized controlled trials that had at least one treatment arm that involved IUD insertion immediately after an induced abortion or after curettage for spontaneous abortion. We identified 12 trials which described random assignment but excluded three from this review. Two of these revealed unethical research conduct, and one used alternate assignment to treatments.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We evaluated the methodological quality of each report and abstracted information onto a data collection form. We focused on gross discontinuation rates (single-decrement life table analysis) for accidental pregnancy, perforation, expulsion, and pelvic inflammatory disease. We entered the data into RevMan 3.1 for analysis of Peto odds ratios.

MAIN RESULTS

In large multicenter trials, the TCu 220C device proved superior to either the Lippes Loop D or the Copper 7 IUDs for immediate postabortal insertion. In single-center trials, the Nova T IUD had a significantly higher discontinuation rate for pregnancy than did the Multiload 250 (OR 4.5; 95% CI 1.0-19.8), while the Nova T had a significantly lower discontinuation rate for pregnancy than did the TCu 200 (OR 0.3; 95% CI 0.1-0.9). The levonorgestrel-releasing device was more effective in preventing pregnancy than was the Nova T. Only one trial compared immediate vs. delayed insertion. In this trial, the performance of the Copper 7 IUD inserted immediately after abortion was inferior to that after interval insertion (remote from pregnancy), although the differences were not statistically significant.

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

Insertion of an IUD immediately after abortion is both safe and practical. IUD expulsion rates appear higher than after interval insertions.

Contraception choice for HIV positive women

UNAIDS/WHO estimates that 42 million people are living with HIV/AIDS worldwide and 50% of all adults with HIV infection are women predominantly infected via heterosexual transmission. Women with HIV infection, like other women, may wish to plan pregnancy, limit their family, or avoid pregnancy. Health professionals should enable these reproductive choices by counselling and appropriate contraception provision at the time of HIV diagnosis and during follow up. The aim of this article is to present a global overview of contraception choice for women living with HIV infection including effects on sexual transmission risk.

Intrauterine Contraceptive Devices and Risk of Pelvic Inflammatory Disease

The intrauterine contraceptive device (IUD) is highly effective and cost-effective. IUD use is limited in some regions, however, due to concerns about increased risk of pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) and subsequent complications such as infertility and ectopic pregnancy. Recent reviews suggest that the overall risk of PID with modern IUDs is lower than previously thought, at least in regions with a low prevalence of sexually transmitted infections (STIs). Risk of PID may be higher, however, in places where gonorrhoea and chlamydia are prevalent, where screening for STIs is limited and where aseptic conditions for insertion are difficult to ensure. A World Health Organization multi-centre study and other studies have confirmed regional differences in STI prevalence, and the WHO study established that PID risk is temporally related to IUD insertion procedures. Studies of the effectiveness of antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent infectious complications are inconclusive due at least in part to use of sub-therapeutic regimens for pathogens commonly implicated in PID. In summary, the IUD can be safe and effective if inserted under aseptic conditions in women free of cervical infection. Further study is needed to define appropriate standards of care for IUD insertion where STI prevalence is high and ability to rule out infection is limited. Even with safe insertion, IUD promotion in areas of high STI/HIV prevalence must address women's needs for dual protection from infection and unwanted pregnancy.

Sexually transmitted infections and contraceptives: selective issues

It is important to examine the successful completed research and use it to move forward in practice to halt the almost 50% unintended pregnancy rate in the United States and the continued worldwide epidemic of HIV and other STIs. A significant development has been the evidence supporting the IUD as a valuable contraceptive option available to many women, including women who are HIV infected, with no increased risks of infertility or PID. Evidence exists that OCPs may increase chlamydial infection acquisition and cervicitis, but it is unlikely that OCP use is associated with PID. The lack of female-controlled dual method protection remains a void, but with the introduction of products such as FemCap and Reality condom and the continuing progress of microbicides and spermicides, the future is brighter. Clearly research into the interactions of STIs and contraceptives must continue to discern how best to approach a resolution to these public health concerns that affect women and the global population.

The Levonorgestrel Intrauterine System: A Clinical Perspective from the UK

The main contraceptive effects of this valuable product [the levonorgestrel intrauterine system (LNG-IUS)] are by endometrial suppression and changes to the cervical mucus and uterotubal fluid that impair sperm migration. The blood levels of LNG are very low, so progestogenic symptoms are uncommon. Most women still ovulate and in the remainder sufficient estrogen for health is produced from the ovary, even if they become amenorrhoeic, as many do; this is primarily a local end-organ effect and should be seen as a benefit. Although usable by selected nulliparae, it is ideal for the parous woman. It has unsurpassed efficacy, and return of fertility is rapid. Combining the best features of hormonal and intrauterine contraception, its gynecological benefits are impressive: the LNG-IUS user can expect a dramatic reduction in the amount and, after the first few occasionally troublesome months, in the duration of blood loss. Hemoglobin levels rise and dysmenorrhea is usually greatly benefited, unlike with current uterine ablation techniques. In perimenopausal women, it can protect the endometrium from overstimulation when estrogen replacement therapy (ERT) is added, by any chosen route. It thus provides a contraceptive modality of ERT with, usually, no bleeding and few progestogenic side effects-and is applicable before final ovarian failure. In summary, adverse side effects are few and in general they are not in the "hazardous" category. Regarding the admitted inconvenience of the first weeks of light postinsertion bleeding and the early phase low incidence of steroidal side effects: good counseling is paramount, since forewarned is forearmed!

Advances in Female Hormonal Contraception

Despite the wide variety of reversible contraceptives, unintended pregnancy rates in developed nations are still considered markedly elevated by most epidemiologists and clinicians. Indeed, the US has one of the highest unintended pregnancy rates among the industrialized nations of the world. Although many factors appear to influence this problem, what may play an important role in this apparent paradox is the process by which a woman obtains contraception. Although most nonbarrier methods have similar efficacy, the ability to use that method consistently and correctly will determine whether it provides maximal contraception. Oral contraceptives are the most popular method in the US; accordingly, the process by which US women obtain their contraception may not take into account the desire of many women to use nondaily methods. The recent introduction of nondaily methods in the US and elsewhere has provided more choice so that a successful contraceptive decision can be made in the first instance rather than after an adverse clinical outcome or unintended pregnancy with a method not as well suited to that woman's lifestyle. These new methods are not characterized by improved safety or efficacy; rather, they have novel components or delivery systems that may provide important options to women who may not be able to or willing to use existing methods of contraception. The transdermal patch, vaginal ring, and monthly injectable are combination estrogen/progestogen methods characterized by novel delivery systems and compliance regimens. The single rod implant is a facile and well accepted method that has not yet been approved for use in the US but has been an increasingly popular choice elsewhere. The levonorgestrel intrauterine system has been used in Europe for over 10 years and has recently been introduced in the US. This intrauterine contraceptive provides high efficacy and reliability, and may have considerable noncontraceptive benefit with regard to the nonsurgical treatment of uterine bleeding problems and endometrial protection for menopausal hormone therapy. The increasing popularity of these methods can be considered a testament to the desire of women to consider nondaily contraceptives as first-line, mainstream options. It is hoped that increasing use of these methods will lead to a considerable decrease in the rate of unintended pregnancy.

Bacteriological cultures of removed intrauterine devices and pelvic inflammatory disease

Intrauterine devices (IUDs) are highly effective, long-term methods of contraception. Although evidence of a direct association between IUD use and pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) is scarce, concerns about PID related to IUDs use has limited their use throughout the world. We designed this study to examine the effect of IUDs on PID. For the study, we recruited 200 participants from among women who requested an IUD as a means of contraception. The IUDs were removed 36 months later or in case of PID. No PID cases were recorded during the follow-up period. Prior to IUD insertion, 121 women (60.5%) had symptoms and/or signs of lower genital tract infection, whereas during the follow-up period 179 women (89.5%) had symptoms and/or signs of lower genital tract infection. The Papanicolaou smears were negative for Actinomyces throughout the study period. Also, cultures for sexualy transmitted disease microorganisms were negative throughout the study period. Following IUD removal, 189 IUD cultures (94.5%) were positive. The bacterial flora of the removed IUDs consisted of common aerobic and anaerobic microorganisms that do not account for PID. The most common microorganisms identified were Staphylococcus coagulase negative, Eschericia coli, and Enterococcus faecalis. IUDs are a very effective and safe method of contraception if potential recipients are selected carefully. Culture of the removed IUDs and therapeutic management of women with positive cultures are not recommended when women are asymptomatic for PID.

An update on pelvic inflammatory disease

A review of the publications on pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) over the past 18 months reveals a number of common themes. This brief article highlights some relevant papers which may be of interest and summarises their main messages.

Immediate postabortal insertion of intrauterine devices

BACKGROUND

Insertion of an intrauterine device (IUD) immediately after an abortion has several potential advantages. The woman is known not to be pregnant, a major concern for clinicians. For example, many clinicians refuse to insert an IUD in a woman who is not menstruating [Stanback 1997]. After induced abortion, a woman's motivation to use contraception may be high. Among women who have limited access to a clinician, abortion care may provide a unique opportunity to address a woman's need for contraception [Mahomed 1997; McLaurin 1993; Wolf 1994]. A copper IUD confers nearly the same contraceptive efficacy as does tubal sterilization [Peterson 1996], yet it is simpler, less expensive, and promptly reversible. In addition, insertion of an IUD immediately after abortion may avoid discomfort related to insertion, and any bleeding from the insertion will be disguised by the expected bleeding after abortion. However, insertion of an IUD immediately after a pregnancy ends carries potential risks as well. For example, the risk of perforation may be increased due to softening of the myometrium. One IUD manufacturer in the United States warns that "The PROGESTASERT(R) system is not intended for immediate postabortion or postpartum insertion It should not be inserted until involution of the uterus is complete. The incidence of perforation and expulsion is greater if involution is not completed." [ALZA 1998] The package labeling for the Copper 7 stated that it should not be inserted after an abortion until involution was complete "in order to avoid a higher incidence of perforation or expulsion."[Gillett 1980] Another potential concern is infection. Insertion of an IUD after a clandestine or unsafe abortion may increase the risk of upper genital tract infection compared with interval insertion (remote from pregnancy).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the safety and efficacy of IUD insertion immediately after spontaneous or induced abortion.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We used Medline, Popline, and EMBASE computer searches, supplemented by review articles and contacts with investigators.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We sought all randomized controlled trials that had at least one treatment arm that involved IUD insertion immediately after an induced abortion or after curettage for spontaneous abortion. We identified 12 trials which described random assignment but excluded three from this review. Two of these revealed unethical research conduct, and one used alternate assignment to treatments.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We evaluated the methodological quality of each report and abstracted information onto a data collection form. We focused on gross discontinuation rates (single-decrement life table analysis) for accidental pregnancy, perforation, expulsion, and pelvic inflammatory disease. We entered the data into RevMan 3.1 for analysis of Peto odds ratios.

MAIN RESULTS

In large multicenter trials, the TCu 220C device proved superior to either the Lippes Loop D or the Copper 7 IUDs for immediate post-abortal insertion. The Peto OR for discontinuation for pregnancy was 0.4 (95% CI 0.2-0.7) compared with the Lippes Loop D and 0.5 (95% CI 0.3-0.8) compared with the Copper 7. Expulsions were also significantly less common with the TCu 220C than with the other two IUDs. In single-center trials, the Nova T IUD had a signicantly higher discontinuation rate for pregnancy than did the Multiload 250 (OR 4.5; 95% CI 1.0-19.8), while the Nova T had a significantly lower discontinuation rate for pregnancy than did the TCu 200 (OR 0.3; 95% CI 0.1-0.9). Only one trial compared immediate vs. delayed insertion. In this trial, the performance of the Copper 7 IUD inserted immediately after abortion was inferior to that after interval insertion (remote from pregnancy), although the differences were not statistically significant. Addition of copper sleeves to a Lippes Loop D improved its performance, but addition of a topical hydrogel to a Spring Coil did not offer benefit. Overall, rates of perforation and pelvic inflammatory disease were low.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Insertion of an IUD immediately after abortion is both safe and practical. This was true for both induced and reported "spontaneous" abortions, many of which may have been induced under clandestine circumstances. IUD expulsion rates were higher after second-trimester abortions than after earlier abortions, so delaying insertion may be advisable after later abortions. Although Copper 7 devices inserted unrelated to pregnancy may perform better than those inserted after abortion, many women who express interest in intrauterine contraception do not return for the scheduled insertion. These women may remain unprotected against unintended pregnancy. However, evidence is inadequate to compare the safety and efficacy of IUD insertion immediately after abortion vs. insertion some weeks later.

Use of copper intrauterine devices and the risk of tubal infertility among nulligravid women

BACKGROUND

Previous studies of intrauterine devices (IUDs), many of which are no longer in use, suggested that they might cause tubal infertility. The concern that IUDs that contain copper--currently the most commonly used type--may increase the risk of infertility in nulligravid women has limited the use of this highly effective method of birth control.

METHODS

We conducted a case-control study of 1895 women recruited between 1997 and 1999. We enrolled 358 women with primary infertility who had tubal occlusion documented by hysterosalpingography, as well as 953 women with primary infertility who did not have tubal occlusion (infertile controls) and 584 primigravid women (pregnant controls). We collected information on the women's past use of contraceptives, including copper IUDs, previous sexual relationships, and history of genital tract infections. Each woman's blood was tested for antibodies to Chlamydia trachomatis. We used stratified analyses and logistic regression to assess the association between the previous use of a copper IUD and tubal occlusion.

RESULTS

In analyses involving the women with tubal occlusion and the infertile controls, the odds ratio for tubal occlusion associated with the previous use of a copper IUD was 1.0 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.6 to 1.7). When the primigravid women served as the controls, the corresponding odds ratio was 0.9 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.5 to 1.6). Tubal infertility was not associated with the duration of IUD use, the reason for the removal of the IUD, or the presence or absence of gynecologic problems related to its use. The presence of antibodies to chlamydia was associated with infertility.

CONCLUSIONS

The previous use of a copper IUD is not associated with an increased risk of tubal occlusion among nulligravid women whereas infection with C. trachomatis is.

Evaluation of postabortion IUD insertion in Egyptian women

This study was carried out at Alhussein University Hospital and Elmonera General Hospital to assess the safety and efficacy of intrauterine device (IUD) insertion immediately after spontaneous abortion compared with insertion 2 weeks after abortion. One hundred women between ages 18 and 40 years were recruited from those admitted via the emergency room with first trimester spontaneous abortion. All women were counseled about a method of contraception, particularly copper T-380, and divided into two groups: Group I, which included 69 women who preferred immediate IUD insertion, and Group II, which included 31 women who asked for late IUD insertion 2 weeks after an abortion. All women were followed at 2, 6, and 10 weeks after insertion of IUDs. Bleeding patterns were comparable in both groups. Mild bleeding occurred in 9.2% and 16% in Groups I and II, respectively; moderate bleeding occurred in 80% and 64%, respectively, and severe bleeding was observed in 10.8% and 20%, respectively. This was not significant. Expulsion rate was 4.5% and 3.4% in Groups I and II, respectively, which was also not significant. There were no cases of perforation or pelvic infections. This study showed that insertion of an IUD immediately after a spontaneous abortion is safe and could be offered to those who have had an abortion and who ask for a method of contraception.

Contraceptive update Y2K: need for contraception and new contraceptive options

Despite the major strides made in birth control, which have produced a decline in unintended pregnancies over the past decade and the lowest rates of teen pregnancies seen since 1974 (1,2), significant problems still remain. Almost half (48%) of US pregnancies in 1995 were unintended (1) and many more that were "intended" were not planned or prepared for (3). To optimize maternal and fetal outcomes, it is incumbent that physicians both emphasize the need for women to be physically, emotionally, and socially prepared for pregnancy before they conceive as well as ensure the availability of effective methods to allow them to do so. Today, contraceptives are available that permit couples to choose if and when to have children. Although only 5% of women who are sexually active and say they do not want to become pregnant are using no method of birth control (4), that group accounts for nearly 40% of the unintended pregnancies. More than half of all unintended pregnancies occur in women who had used a method in the month of conception (1). The strategy with these women should be to find ways to make the method they select work better for them or to switch them to more effective methods. Unfortunately, the most effective reversible methods are among the least utilized--in part because they have the highest initial costs. Some states, such as California and Maryland, have passed Contraceptive Equity Acts, which require insurance companies that provide any prescriptive drug coverage to cover all forms of prescription contraception. Many other states, as well as the federal government, are now considering similar legislation. It is important, therefore, both from the perspective of quality patient care and also from a fiscal standpoint, that all who care for reproductive-aged women become familiar with the full array of contraceptive options. This article will review the methods of reversible birth control now available in the United States, including the most recent efficacy rates and new practical tips to achieve better utilization, as well as summarize the features of some of the new options that may be nearing introduction.