Risk factors of uterine perforation when using contraceptive intrauterine devices.

BACKGROUND: Intrauterine devices (IUDs) are one of the most popular methods of contraception, and uterine perforation has been presented among the most significant potential complications of IUD use. The aim of this study is to evaluate the risk factors of uterine perforation when using an IUD. METHODS: In this retrospective study, all 164 women who have referred to Al-Zahra hospital in Tabriz- Iran to remove the retained IUD from March 2018 to March 2021, were investigated in two groups. Patients in case group underwent surgery to remove the dislocated device and management of its complications. In control group, the devices were removed using a Novak or ring forceps with or without hysteroscopy with no uterine perforation. Data were analyzed using SPSS software, and P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. P-Value was obtained for qualitative data via Fisher's exact test and Chi-Squared test and for quantitative data via Mann-Whitney U test and independent T-test. RESULTS: The mean age of patients in the groups with or without uterine perforation was 30.57 and 36.78 years respectively (P = 0.01). The frequency of two or more parities among patients with uterine perforation was higher than other patients (P = 0.13). Ultrasound study before (p = 0.037) and after (p = 0.007) IUD insertion was higher among patients without uterine perforation. The less inexperience of healthcare providers (P = 0.013) and lack of scheduled follow-up visits after the IUD insertion (P < 0.001), are the other important factors affecting the uterine perforation. Abdominal pain was the most common compliant of uterine perforation (P < 0.001) and laparoscopy was the most used surgery to remove the misplaced device. CONCLUSION: Uterine perforation can be effectively prevented by hiring experienced health care providers and appropriate patient selection.

Intrauterine Device Completely Encapsulated by Fibrous Tissue in a Postmenopausal Woman: A Case Report.

A 54-year-old woman, who had been menopausal for over two years and had an Intrauterine Device (IUD) in place for over twenty years, requested a removal of the IUD. The IUD was found to be embedded during the removal process. Under ultrasound guidance, a hysteroscopic examination revealed the embedded IUD and additional uterine cavity content. Hysteroscopic removal of the IUD and the foreign body was performed, and the pathology report indicated fibrous tissue with hyaline degeneration. For postmenopausal women with IUDs, early removal is recommended to minimise complications. Hysteroscopic examination should be the first choice for the rare complication of embedded IUDs covered with fibrous tissue, with hysteroscopic removal as the preferred treatment.

Efficacy of intrauterine device procedural analgesics.

ABSTRACT: Nearly half of all pregnancies worldwide are unintended. Intrauterine devices are an effective, long-acting form of pregnancy prevention that require minimal maintenance, and also can be used in patients with menorrhagia. However, they are underused because of pain associated with their insertion. Topical and local anesthesia are good options for reducing procedural pain in select patients. IUD placement falls within the scope of practice for physician associates/assistants (PAs) practicing in family medicine, internal medicine, and women's health. PAs should be aware of these additional analgesia options available to patients in order to increase use of effective contraception.

Colonoscopic removal of an intrauterine device with rectal perforation: A case report.

RATIONALE: The intrauterine device is one of the effective, safe, convenient, economical, and reversible contraceptive methods. Although its contraceptive effect is definite, some female patients may experience complications such as expulsion, bleeding, and pregnancy with the device in place. Rectal perforation is one of the rare and serious complications, which can lead to complications such as abdominal infection and intestinal adhesions, severely affecting the quality of life of patients. PATIENT CONCERNS: A 34-year-old female was sent to the Department of Gastroenterology with noticeable left lower quadrant abdominal pain. She had presented with abdominal discomfort and anal tenesmus 1 year earlier. Two months ago, her abdominal pain had gradually worsened and she was presented to our hospital. DIAGNOSES: Investigations, including colonoscopy and computed tomography scan, had revealed an intrauterine device migrated and perforated into the rectum. INTERVENTIONS AND OUTCOMES: The patient underwent successful colonoscopic removal of the intrauterine device. She recovered well after the treatment. LESSONS: This case proves that endoscopic therapy can be considered the preferred method for removing intrauterine devices displaced into the digestive tract lumen.

One-year continuation of postpartum intrauterine contraceptive device: Findings from a prospective cohort study in India.

OBJECTIVE(S): To estimate continuation rates for postpartum intrauterine contraceptive device (PPIUD) at 6 weeks, 6 months and 1-year within existing programs in an under-resourced setting, and to identify determinants of discontinuation, removal and expulsion. STUDY DESIGN: We used a prospective cohort design and enrolled recent PPIUD adopter women across 100 public healthcare facilities in Odisha and Chhattisgarh, India. We collected their socio-demographic information and followed them up telephonically at 6 weeks, 6 months and 1 year for complications and continuation status. We assessed PPIUD continuation rates and factors associated with PPIUD discontinuation, removal, and expulsion using Cox proportional hazards modelling. RESULTS: We enrolled 916 participants (579 (63.2%) from Odisha and 337 (36.8%) from Chhattisgarh). The continuation rate of PPIUD was 88.7% at 6 weeks, 74.8% at 6 months 60.1% at one year. Once discontinued, chances of not opting for any family planning method was high (up to 81.2%). Participants with education of 6th to 12th class and those experiencing complications (pain abdomen, bleeding and discharge per vaginum) were more likely to remove the IUD with adjusted hazard ratio of 1.82 (95% CI: 1.18-2.79) and 4.39 (95% CI: 3.25-5.93) respectively. For expulsion, we did not find any factor that was statistically significant. CONCLUSION(S): PPIUD continuation rates declined considerably after the initial 6 weeks. Counselling and follow-up services for managing complications must be strengthened, especially in the first 6 weeks of PPIUD insertion, to enhance and sustain programmatic impact. IMPLICATIONS: Our findings emphasize on the need to strengthen client counseling and follow-up for management of complications, especially in the first 6 weeks of insertion of PPIUDs. Ongoing programs need to address comprehensive capacity building efforts in this regard.

Ease of removal of malpositioned intrauterine devices: A retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare removal timing, techniques, and success of malpositioned intrauterine device (IUDs) to nonmalpositioned IUDs. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a retrospective cohort study of IUD users with ultrasound performed between July 2014 and July 2017 within one medical system. We used Fisher exact and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests to compare clinical characteristics and IUD removal details between patients with malpositioned and nonmalpositioned IUDs. RESULTS: Of 1759 ultrasounds reporting the presence of an IUD, 436 described IUD malposition. Of these, 150 described the IUD as embedded and 16 as partially perforated. IUDs were more likely to be removed and removed sooner for patients with malpositioned compared with nonmalpositioned IUDs (281/436 vs 545/1323, p < 0.001 and median 17 days vs 236 days from the index ultrasound, p < 0.001). Most IUDs, malpositioned and nonmalpositioned, were removed on the first attempt (82%, 85%), by a generalist obstetrician and gynecologist (75%, 70%), using a ring forceps (73%, 65%). Most embedded and partially perforated IUDs were removed (68%, 69%), using a ring forceps (59%, 67%), on the first attempt (84%, 91%). CONCLUSIONS: Malpositioned IUDs were more likely to be removed and removed sooner than nonmalpositioned IUDs. Most IUDs, even IUDs labeled as partially perforated or embedded, were removed by a generalist obstetrician and gynecologist, using ring forceps, on first attempt. IMPLICATIONS: Ultrasound findings of IUD malposition are not associated with difficult IUD removal.

Immediate and delayed placement of the intrauterine device after abortion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

This article aims to report the comprehensive and up-to-date analysis and evidence of the insertion rate, expulsion rate, removal rate, and utilization rate of immediate placement of intrauterine devices (IUDs) versus delayed placement after artificial abortion. PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science, CNKI, and Wanfang databases were comprehensively searched up to January 12, 2024 for studies that compared immediate versus delayed insertion of IUDs after abortion. The evaluation metrics included the number of IUD insertion after surgical or medical abortions, the frequency of expulsion and removal at 6 months or 1 year, the number of continued usage, pain intensity scores, the number of infections, the duration of bleeding, and instances of uterine perforation during or after IUD insertion. Ten randomized controlled articles were eligible, comprising 11 research projects, of which 3 projects involved the placement of an IUD after surgical abortion, and 8 projects involved the placement of an IUD after medical abortion. This included 2025 patients (977 in the immediate insertion group and 1,048 in the delayed insertion group). We summarized all the extracted evidence. The meta-analysis results indicated that for post-surgical abortions, the immediate insertion group exhibited a higher IUD placement rate than the delayed insertion group. After medical abortions, the immediate insertion group showed higher rates of IUD placement, utilization, and expulsion at 6 months or 1 year. The two groups showed no statistically significant differences in the removal rate, post-insertion infection rate, pain scores during insertion, and days of bleeding during the follow-up period. Compared to delayed placement, immediate insertion of IUDs can not only increase the usage rate at 6 months or 1 year but also enhance the placement rate.

Pain control during intrauterine device insertion: Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation.

ABSTRACT: Current practice lacks effective periprocedural pain management during common gynecological procedures such as intrauterine device insertion, increasing the possibility of significant pain and adverse reaction to such procedures. Because of this, pain can often be a barrier for a patient in choosing a form of contraception that best serves them. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation offers an option for effective pain control during intrauterine device insertion. This case review characterizes five cases where patients were offered transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation for pain control during intrauterine device insertion. The patients reported a range of no pain to moderate pain during intrauterine device insertion and rated their pain experience as better compared with prior insertions. Although limited to a case review, our findings suggest a promising clinical indication for transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation as a pain management strategy for intrauterine device insertion.

Early intrauterine pregnancy with an intrauterine device in place and terminated with spontaneous abortion: A case report.

RATIONALE: The overall pregnancy rate in individuals with an intrauterine device (IUD) for contraception is <1%. If pregnancy occurs while an IUD is in place, there is a higher risk of an ectopic pregnancy. We report the case of a woman with an IUD who was 7 weeks pregnant and experienced a spontaneous abortion 1 week later. PATIENT CONCERN: A 32-year-old woman presented to our outpatient department with intermittent vaginal staining for several days. DIAGNOSES: She was 7 weeks pregnant and had an IUD in place for over 4 years. A vaginal examination revealed no vaginal bleeding and no blood clots; however, a parous cervix was observed. The IUD string was not visible. Transvaginal ultrasonography revealed a gestational sac in the uterine cavity, with a fetal pole and a crown-rump length of 11.4 mm. The fetal heart rate was 159 beats/min. The IUD was located in the retroplacental region. The bilateral adnexa appeared normal (right ovary, 2.9 cm; left ovary, 2.5 cm). The patient was diagnosed with an intrauterine pregnancy with an IUD in place and threatened abortion. INTERVENTIONS: Attempts to remove the IUD were abandoned due to its location, and conservative treatment was initiated with Utrogestan (100 mg) administered 3 times a day for 1 week. Bed rest was advised. OUTCOMES: Unfortunately, she experienced a complete abortion 1 week later. LESSONS: The novelty of this case report lies in the rare occurrence of an intrauterine pregnancy with a long-term IUD in place, the challenges posed by the IUD's specific location, and the complex management of threatened abortion in this context. Our case highlights the diagnostic management approach for intrauterine pregnancy with an IUD in place. Furthermore, it explores the impact of IUD location on pregnancy prognosis.

Prevalence of high-risk HPV and cervical dysplasia in IUD users and controls: a cross sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the prevalence of infections with high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) and cervical dysplasia, and the clearance rate of HPV infections, in users of different kinds of intrauterine devices (IUDs) and other contraceptive methods. METHODS: A cross-sectional register-based study including 16,181 women aged 30-49 years participating in the screening programme for cervical cancer in a Swedish County in 2017-2018. Data on contraception from screening records was paired with the HPV test results, cytological and histological follow-up tests and subsequent HPV test. RESULTS: There was no difference in the risk of being HPV positive, or histological HSIL+, between users of copper-containing IUDs and women with no reported use of contraception. Use of levonorgestrel intrauterine system and hormonal contraception were associated with higher odds for HPV infection in age-adjusted models (aOR 1.21; 95% CI 1.04-1.41, and aOR 1.41; 95% CI 1.22-1.63, respectively) and for HSIL+ (aOR 1.45; 95% CI 1.02-2.06, and aOR 1.56; 95% CI 1.13-2.16, respectively). No significant differences were found in HPV clearance rates. CONCLUSIONS: Reported use of levonorgestrel intrauterine system and hormonal contraception, but not use of copper IUD, was associated with a higher prevalence of HPV infections and histological HSIL + compared to no reported use of contraception.

Women using copper IUD showed no difference in prevalence of HPV or cervical dysplasia compared to women not using contraception in cross-sectional study.

Performance of a handheld point of care ultrasonography to assess IUD position compared to conventional transvaginal ultrasonography.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the performance of the abdominal handheld point-of-care ultrasonography (POCUS) Butterfly-iQ to gold standard transvaginal ultrasonography (US) in identifying the position of intrauterine devices (IUDs) in the hands of a medical doctor specialised in ultrasonography. METHODS: In this diagnostic accuracy study, a single operator conducted abdominal POCUS followed by conventional transvaginal US. Seventy patients utilising copper or hormonal IUDs were assessed between June 2021 and October 2022. IUDs were categorised as entirely within the uterine cavity or malpositioned. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy were calculated for detecting malpositioned IUDs, with conventional US results serving as the reference standard. Concordance rate and Kappa coefficient were computed to assess the agreement between the two ultrasound modalities. RESULTS: Among the 70 patients, 46 (65.7%) used copper IUDs, and 24 (34.3%) used hormonal IUDs. Conventional transvaginal US showed IUDs entirely within the uterine cavity in 56 (80%) patients and 14 (20%) IUDs were malpositioned. Of the 14 malpositioned IUDs seen by conventional US, POCUS identified 13 demonstrating a sensitivity of 92.9% (66.1-99.8). Of the 56 IUDs entirely within the uterine cavity shown by conventional US, only two cases were considered malpositioned by POCUS demonstrating a specificity of 96.4% (87.7-99.6). The concordance rate was 95.7%, and the Kappa value was 0.87 in differentiating between IUDs entirely within the uterine cavity and those that were malpositioned. CONCLUSION: Abdominal POCUS using Butterfly-iQ, when administered by an imaging specialist, exhibited excellent performance in confirming IUDs entirely within the uterine cavity.

Through a smartphone-based handheld point-of-care ultrasonography it was possible to correctly evaluate the position of intrauterine devices (IUDs) in a sample of 70 patients (46 using copper and 24 using hormonal IUDs).

Effects of intrauterine device use on attack frequency and severity in woman of reproductive age with familial Mediterranean fever.

AIM: Familial Mediterranean fever (FMF) is the most common inherited autoinflammatory disease in the world. There are known triggers to initiate an FMF attack, yet potential effects of intrauterine devices (IUD) in women of reproductive age have not been evaluated before. METHOD: Consecutive female patients with FMF who ever used IUD over the age of 18 were enrolled. Female patients with FMF were sub grouped according to the type of IUD they use. FMF attack frequency, severity, duration, presence of dysmenorrhea, severity of dysmenorrhea, having attacks during menstruation before and after IUD use were questioned. Demographic and clinical data were collected from hospital database. RESULTS: When all patients with IUD use were evaluated, it was found that the frequency of attacks increased after IUD insertion at 3rd and 12th months (median [min-max] attack frequency at 3rd month, 1 (0-3) vs 1 (0-6), p = 0.002, median [min-max] attack frequency at 12th month, 2 (0-12) vs 3.5 (0-18), p = 0.028). Attack severity measured by VAS pain was also significantly increased. Attack duration and menstrual pain was similar before and after IUD use. Attack frequency at 3rd and 12th months, attack severity and menstrual pain was all increased significantly in Cu-IUD users, whereas none of these parameters deteriorated in LNG-IUD group. CONCLUSION: IUD use, especially Cu-IUD, may increase the frequency and severity of attacks in female patients with FMF. Clinicians may benefit from considering LGN-IUD if IUDs are preferred as contraception in women of childbearing age with FMF.

Increasing utilization of intrauterine device insertion at hysteroscopic endometrial evaluation for patients with endometrial hyperplasia.

PURPOSE: To examine the utilization and characteristics related to the use of hysteroscopy at the time of endometrial evaluation for endometrial hyperplasia in the outpatient surgery setting. METHODS: This cross-sectional study queried the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project's Nationwide Ambulatory Surgery Sample. The study population was 3218 patients with endometrial hyperplasia who underwent endometrial evaluation from January 2016 to December 2019. Performance and clinical characteristics of hysteroscopic endometrial evaluation were assessed with multivariable binary logistic regression models. RESULTS: A total of 2654 (82.5%) patients had hysteroscopic endometrial tissue evaluation. Patients with postmenopausal bleeding, heavy menstrual bleeding, and polycystic ovary syndrome were more likely to undergo hysteroscopic endometrial evaluation in multivariable analysis (all, adjusted-P < 0.001). Uterine injury occurred in 4.9 per 1000 hysteroscopic endometrial evaluations; none had uterine injury in the non-hysteroscopy cohort. Among the 2654 patients who had hysteroscopic endometrial evaluation, 106 (4.0%) patients had intrauterine device insertion at surgery, and the utilization increased from 2.9 to 5.8% during the study period (P-trend < 0.001). Younger age, more recent year surgery, and obesity were independently associated with increased utilization of intrauterine device insertion at hysteroscopic endometrial evaluation (all, adjusted-P < 0.05). Among 2023 reproductive-age patients with endometrial hyperplasia, 1666 (82.4%) patients underwent hysteroscopic endometrial evaluation. On multivariable analysis, patients with heavy menstrual bleeding were more likely to have hysteroscopic endometrial evaluation (adjusted-P < 0.05). Intrauterine device insertion increased from 3.7% in 2016 to 8.0% in 2019 (P-trend = 0.007). CONCLUSION: This nationwide analysis suggests that the insertion of intrauterine devices at the time of hysteroscopic endometrial tissue evaluation for endometrial hyperplasia is increasing among reproductive-age population.

Factors associated with a negative Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) response with intrauterine device placement: A retrospective survey of HER Salt Lake participants.

OBJECTIVES: In an established cohort of HER Salt Lake Contraceptive Initiative participants with a prior intrauterine device (IUD) placement, we sought to (1) define the proportion of participants who reported a negative Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) response, (2) explore factors associated with an unacceptable PASS response, and (3) identify pain management preferences for IUD placement. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective survey was sent to 1440 HER Salt Lake IUD users. A PASS question queried IUD placement pain experience acceptability. We explored associations between an unacceptable PASS response and sociodemographic, reproductive and other individual characteristics using t-tests, chi-square tests, and multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Of those surveyed, 620 responded (43%), and 41.6% reported an unacceptable PASS response. Those with an unacceptable PASS response reported a significantly higher experienced pain level (79.2 mm vs 51.8 mm; p < 0.01) than those with an acceptable response, were more likely to have an anxiety diagnosis (47.7% vs 37.1%; p < 0.01), and have a trauma history (33.7% vs 25.1%; p = 0.02). Most patients were not offered pain control options, but 29.4% used ibuprofen and 25.3% had a support person. Regardless of PASS response, if offered, 59.0% desired numbing medication, 56.8% ibuprofen, 51% heating pad, 33.2% support person, and 31.8% anti-anxiety medication, among others. In our multivariable logistic regression model, higher pain was associated with unacceptable PASS response (OR 1.07, 95% CI 1.05-1.08; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The common finding of unacceptable pain experiences with IUD placement may cause negative perceptions of an otherwise desirable method. Incorporation of the PASS response into IUD pain management studies could expand our pain experience understanding. IMPLICATIONS: IUD placement resulted in unacceptable pain experiences for 41.6% of respondents. Screening for anxiety and trauma history could identify at-risk patients to individualize pain management strategies. Incorporation of the PASS into future IUD pain management studies could result in a more comprehensive, patient-centered measure of patient experiences.