PDF herunterladen
Semin Reprod Med 2016; 34(03): 175-182
DOI: 10.1055/s-0036-1571438
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Intrauterine Contraception

Jennifer K. Hsia
1   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of California, Sacramento, California
,
Mitchell D. Creinin
1   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of California, Sacramento, California
› Institutsangaben
Weitere Informationen

Publikationsverlauf

Publikationsdatum:
04. März 2016 (online)

    Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Currently, there are only two basic types of intrauterine devices (IUDs): copper and hormonal. However, other types of IUDs are under development, some of which are in clinical trials around the world. Continued development has focused on increasing efficacy, longer duration of use, and noncontraceptive benefits. This review discusses currently available intrauterine contraceptives, such as the Cu380A IUD and levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine systems; novel intrauterine contraceptives that are available in select parts of the world including the intrauterine ball, low-dose copper products, frameless devices, and intrauterine delivery systems impregnated with noncontraceptive medication; and novel products currently in development.

Keywords

intrauterine device - levonorgestrel - copper - frameless - indomethacin
 

  • References

  • 1 Wessel GM. Of camels, silkworms, and contraception. Mol Reprod Dev 2014; 81 (9) :Fmi
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 2 Guttmacher AF. Intra-uterine contraceptive devices. J Reprod Fertil 1965; 10: 115-128
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 3 Sivin I, Greenslade F, Schmidt F, Waldman SN. The Copper 380 intrauterine device: a summary of scientific data. New York: Population Council, Inc; 1992: 1-50
    Suche in Google Scholar
  • 4 Sonfield A. Popularity disparity: attitudes about the IUD in Europe and the United States. Guttmacher Policy Rev 2007; 10 (4) 19-24
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 5 Hubacher D. The checkered history and bright future of intrauterine contraception in the United States. Perspect Sex Reprod Health 2002; 34 (2) 98-103
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 6 World Contraceptive Use 2012 (United Nations publication, POP/DB/CP/Rev2012); 2013 Update for the MDG Database: Contraceptive Prevalence (United Nations publication, POP/DB/CP/A/MDG2013); and 2013 Update for the MDG Database: Unmet Need for Family Planning (United Nations publication, POP/DB/CP/B/MDG2013). Available at: http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/publications/pdf/family/worldContraceptivePatternsWallChart2013.pdf
    PubMed
  • 7 ESHRE Capri Workshop Group. Intrauterine devices and intrauterine systems. Hum Reprod Update 2008; 14 (3) 197-208
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 8 Cheng D. The intrauterine device: still misunderstood after all these years. South Med J 2000; 93 (9) 859-864
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 9 Hubacher D, Finer LB, Espey E. Renewed interest in intrauterine contraception in the United States: evidence and explanation. Contraception 2011; 83 (4) 291-294
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 10 Finer LB, Jerman J, Kavanaugh ML. Changes in use of long-acting contraceptive methods in the United States, 2007-2009. Fertil Steril 2012; 98 (4) 893-897
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 11 Kavanaugh ML, Jerman J, Finer LB. Changes in use of long-acting reversible contraceptive methods among U.S. women, 2009–2012. Obstet Gynecol 2015; 126 (5) 917-927
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 12 Trussell J. Contraceptive failure in the United States. Contraception 2011; 83 (5) 397-404
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 13 Eisenberg DL, Schreiber CA, Turok DK, Teal SB, Westhoff CL, Creinin MD ; ACCESS IUS Investigators. Three-year efficacy and safety of a new 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system. Contraception 2015; 92 (1) 10-16
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 14 Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals Inc . Mirena full prescribing information. 2014; Available at: http://labeling.bayerhealthcare.com/html/products/pi/Mirena_PI.pdf
    PubMed
  • 15 Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals Inc . Skyla full prescribing information. 2013 ; Available at: http://labeling.bayerhealthcare.com/html/products/pi/Skyla_PI.pdf
    PubMed
  • 16 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. U.S. medical eligibility criteria for contraceptive use, 2010. Adapted from the World Health Organization medical eligibility criteria for contraceptive use, 4th ed. MMWR 2010; 59 (No. RR-4) 11-63
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 17 World Health Organization. Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use, 5th ed. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2015
    Suche in Google Scholar
  • 18 Hoover KW, Tao G, Kent CK. Trends in the diagnosis and treatment of ectopic pregnancy in the United States. Obstet Gynecol 2010; 115 (3) 495-502
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 19 Stulberg DB, Cain LR, Dahlquist I, Lauderdale DS. Ectopic pregnancy rates and racial disparities in the Medicaid population, 2004-2008. Fertil Steril 2014; 102 (6) 1671-1676
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 20 Ganacharya S, Bhattoa HP, Batár I. Ectopic pregnancy among non-medicated and copper-containing intrauterine device users: a 10-year follow-up. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2003; 111 (1) 78-82
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 21 Backman T, Rauramo I, Huhtala S, Koskenvuo M. Pregnancy during the use of levonorgestrel intrauterine system. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004; 190 (1) 50-54
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 22 American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 121: Long-acting reversible contraception: implants and intrauterine devices. Obstet Gynecol 2011; 118 (1) 184-196
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 23 UN Development Programme. Long-term reversible contraception. Twelve years of experience with the TCu380A and TCu220C. Contraception 1997; 56 (6) 341-352
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 24 Sivin I. Utility and drawbacks of continuous use of a copper T IUD for 20 years. Contraception 2007; 75 (6, Suppl): S70-S75
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 25 Ortiz ME, Croxatto HB. Copper-T intrauterine device and levonorgestrel intrauterine system: biological bases of their mechanism of action. Contraception 2007; 75 (6, Suppl): S16-S30
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 26 Achilles SL, Creinin MD, Stoner KA, Chen BA, Meyn L, Hillier SL. Changes in genital tract immune cell populations after initiation of intrauterine contraception. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2014; 211 (5) 489.e1-489.e9
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 27 Hubacher D, Reyes V, Lillo S , et al. Preventing copper intrauterine device removals due to side effects among first-time users: randomized trial to study the effect of prophylactic ibuprofen. Hum Reprod 2006; 21 (6) 1467-1472
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 28 Bahamondes L, Brache V, Meirik O, Ali M, Habib N, Landoulsi S ; WHO Study Group on Contraceptive Implants for Women. A 3-year multicentre randomized controlled trial of etonogestrel- and levonorgestrel-releasing contraceptive implants, with non-randomized matched copper-intrauterine device controls. Hum Reprod 2015; 30 (11) 2527-2538
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 29 ACOG. Practice bulletin 152: emergency contraception. Obstet Gynecol 2015; 126 (3) 685-686
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 30 Cleland K, Zhu H, Goldstuck N, Cheng L, Trussell J. The efficacy of intrauterine devices for emergency contraception: a systematic review of 35 years of experience. Hum Reprod 2012; 27 (7) 1994-2000
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 31 Wu JP, Pickle S. Extended use of the intrauterine device: a literature review and recommendations for clinical practice. Contraception 2014; 89 (6) 495-503
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 32 McNicholas C, Maddipati R, Zhao Q, Swor E, Peipert JF. Use of the etonogestrel implant and levonorgestrel intrauterine device beyond the U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved duration. Obstet Gynecol 2015; 125 (3) 599-604
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 33 Seeber B, Ziehr SC, Gschlieber A , et al. Quantitative levonorgestrel plasma level measurements in patients with regular and prolonged use of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system. Contraception 2012; 86 (4) 345-349
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 34 Sivin I, Stern J, Coutinho E , et al. Prolonged intrauterine contraception: a seven-year randomized study of the levonorgestrel 20 mcg/day (LNg 20) and the Copper T380 Ag IUDS. Contraception 1991; 44 (5) 473-480
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 35 Lewis RA, Taylor D, Natavio MF, Melamed A, Felix J, Mishell Jr D. Effects of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system on cervical mucus quality and sperm penetrability. Contraception 2010; 82 (6) 491-496
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 36 Nelson A, Apter D, Hauck B , et al. Two low-dose levonorgestrel intrauterine contraceptive systems: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 2013; 122 (6) 1205-1213
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 37 Kaunitz AM, Bissonnette F, Monteiro I, Lukkari-Lax E, DeSanctis Y, Jensen J. Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system for heavy menstrual bleeding improves hemoglobin and ferritin levels. Contraception 2012; 86 (5) 452-457
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 38 Gupta J, Kai J, Middleton L, Pattison H, Gray R, Daniels J ; ECLIPSE Trial Collaborative Group. Levonorgestrel intrauterine system versus medical therapy for menorrhagia. N Engl J Med 2013; 368 (2) 128-137
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 39 Mawet M, Nollevaux F, Nizet D , et al. Impact of a new levonorgestrel intrauterine system, Levosert(®), on heavy menstrual bleeding: results of a one-year randomised controlled trial. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 2014; 19 (3) 169-179
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 40 Lethaby AE, Cooke I, Rees M. Progesterone or progestogen-releasing intrauterine systems for heavy menstrual bleeding. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2005; 4 (4) CD002126
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 41 Bahamondes L, Valeria Bahamondes M, Shulman LP. Non-contraceptive benefits of hormonal and intrauterine reversible contraceptive methods. Hum Reprod Update 2015; 21 (5) 640-651
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 42 Hubacher D, Grimes DA. Noncontraceptive health benefits of intrauterine devices: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol Surv 2002; 57 (2) 120-128
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 43 Kelekci S, Kelekci KH, Yilmaz B. Effects of levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system and T380A intrauterine copper device on dysmenorrhea and days of bleeding in women with and without adenomyosis. Contraception 2012; 86 (5) 458-463
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 44 Gardner FJ, Konje JC, Bell SC , et al. Prevention of tamoxifen induced endometrial polyps using a levonorgestrel releasing intrauterine system long-term follow-up of a randomised control trial. Gynecol Oncol 2009; 114 (3) 452-456
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 45 Zhao G, Li M, Zhu P, Xu R, Wang J, Xu R. A preliminary morphometric study on the endometrium from patients treated with indomethacin-releasing copper intrauterine device. Hum Reprod 1997; 12 (7) 1563-1566
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 46 Zhang S, Li Y, Yu P , et al. In vitro release of cupric ion from intrauterine devices: influence of frame, shape, copper surface area and indomethacin. Biomed Microdevices 2015; 17 (1) 19
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 47 Tian K, Xie C, Xia X. Chitosan/alginate multilayer film for controlled release of IDM on Cu/LDPE composite intrauterine devices. Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 2013; 109: 82-89
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 48 Hu X, Li L, Zou Y, Wu S. A multicenter comparative study of UCu200, TCu380A, and medicated γ-IUD devices inserted immediately after vacuum aspiration. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2013; 122 (1) 65-69
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 49 Bilian X. Chinese experience with intrauterine devices. Contraception 2007; 75 (6, Suppl): S31-S34
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 50 Baram I, Weinstein A, Trussell J. The IUB, a newly invented IUD: a brief report. Contraception 2014; 89 (2) 139-141
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 51 OCON Medical Ltd . The next generation IUD: intrauterine ball. Available at: http://www.oconmed.com/fileadmin/user_upload/Ocon-IUB-Doctors-Overview-DO_EN_090215_2.pdf . Accessed September 27, 2015
    PubMed
  • 52 Wiebe E, Trussell J. Discontinuation rates and acceptability during 1 year of using the intrauterine ball (the SCu380A). Contraception 2015 Dec 8. pii: S0010-7824(15)30125-6. doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2015.12.002. [Epub ahead of print]
    PubMed
  • 53 Meirik O, Rowe PJ, Peregoudov A, Piaggio G, Petzold M ; IUD Research Group at the UNDP/UNFPA/WHO/World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction. The frameless copper IUD (GyneFix) and the TCu380A IUD: results of an 8-year multicenter randomized comparative trial. Contraception 2009; 80 (2) 133-141
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 54 Oswal A, Oswal A, Loizides S, Robinson C. Gynefix tales: cervical perforation and repeated late expulsion with the Gynefix device. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 2008; 13 (2) 215-217
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 55 Sajjad Y, Selvan G, Kirwan JM, Kingsland CR. Gynaefix frameless IUD: cause of bowel resection. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 2006; 11 (3) 241-242
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 56 Eskandar OS, Eckford SD. Intravesical migration of a GyneFix intrauterine device. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care 2003; 29 (4) 237-238
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 57 Aust TR, Kirwan JN, Herod JJ, McVicker JT. Perforation with the GyneFix intrauterine implant: is there a common factor?. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care 2003; 29 (3) 155-156
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 58 Reuter S, Krishnamurthy S. Intra-uterine implant (GyneFix) lost via intestinal route?. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care 2001; 27 (3) 159-160
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 59 Gandhi JD, Whitmore J, Iskander MN. Uterine perforation by GyneFix frameless IUD: two case reports. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care 2001; 27 (3) 153-154
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 60 Mansour D. Perforation with GyneFix IUD. Br J Fam Plann 2000; 26 (3) 179
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 61 al-Kamil RK. Perforation of uterus by the GyneFix intrauterine contraceptive device. Int J Clin Pract 2000; 54 (2) 128-129
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 62 Vekemans M, Verougstraete A. Late uterine perforation with an anchored IUD, the Gynefix: a case report. Contraception 1999; 60 (1) 55-56
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 63 Wildemeersch D, Andrade A. Review of clinical experience with the frameless LNG-IUS for contraception and treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding. Gynecol Endocrinol 2010; 26 (5) 383-389
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 64 Wildemeersch D, Jandi S, Pett A, Nolte K, Hasskamp T, Vrijens M. Use of frameless intrauterine devices and systems in young nulliparous and adolescent women: results of a multicenter study. Int J Womens Health 2014; 6: 727-734
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 65 Andrade A, Wildemeersch D. Menstrual blood loss in women using the frameless FibroPlant LNG-IUS. Contraception 2009; 79 (2) 134-138
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 66 Reeves MF, Hathaway MJ, Canela Oleaga JM, Katz BH, Tal MG. A randomized single-blinded trial of VeraCept, a novel nitinol low-dose copper intrauterine contraceptive compared with a copper T380S intrauterine contraceptive. [Abstract] Obstet Gynecol 2015; 125 (5, Suppl): 5s
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 67 Gemzell-Danielsson K, Apter D, Hauck B , et al. The effect of age, parity and body mass index on the efficacy, safety, placement and user satisfaction associated with two low-dose levonorgestrel intrauterine contraceptive systems: subgroup analyses of data from a phase III trial. PLoS ONE 2015; 10 (9) e0135309
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar