Lactogenesis and breastfeeding after immediate vs delayed birth-hospitalization insertion of etonogestrel contraceptive implant: a noninferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Initiating a progestin-based contraceptive before the drop in progesterone required to start lactogenesis stage II could theoretically affect lactation. Previous studies have shown that initiating progestin-based contraception in the postnatal period before birth-hospitalization discharge has no detrimental effects on breastfeeding initiation or continuation compared with outpatient interval initiation. However, there are currently no breastfeeding data on the impact of initiating the etonogestrel contraceptive implant in the early postnatal period immediately in the delivery room. OBJECTIVE: This study examined the effect of delivery room vs delayed birth-hospitalization contraceptive etonogestrel implant insertion on breastfeeding outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: This was a noninferiority randomized controlled trial to determine if time to lactogenesis stage II (initiation of copious milk secretion) differs by timing of etonogestrel implant insertion during the birth-hospitalization. We randomly assigned pregnant people to insertion at 0 to 2 hours (delivery room) vs 24 to 48 hours (delayed) postdelivery. Participants intended to breastfeed, desired a contraceptive implant for postpartum contraception, were fluent in English or Spanish, and had no allergy or contraindication to the etonogestrel implant. We collected demographic information and breastfeeding intentions at enrollment. Onset of lactogenesis stage II was assessed daily using a validated tool. The noninferiority margin for the mean difference in time to lactogenesis stage II was defined as 12 hours in a per-protocol analysis. Additional electronic surveys collected data on breastfeeding and contraceptive continuation at 2 and 4 weeks, and 3, 6, and 12 months. RESULTS: We enrolled and randomized 95 participants; 77 participants were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis (n=38 in the delivery room group and n=39 in the delayed group) after excluding 18 because of withdrawing consent, changing contraceptive or breastfeeding plans, or failing to provide primary outcome data. A total of 69 participants were included in the as-treated analysis (n=35 delivery room, n=34 delayed); 8 participants who received the etonogestrel implant outside the protocol windows were excluded, and 2 participants from the delivery room group received the etonogestrel implant at 24 to 48 hours and were analyzed with the delayed group. Participants were similar between groups in age, gestational age, and previous breastfeeding experience. Delivery room insertion was noninferior to delayed birth-hospitalization insertion in time to lactogenesis stage II (delivery room [mean±standard deviation], 65±25 hours; delayed, 73±61 hours; mean difference, -9 hours; 95% confidence interval, -27 to 10). Onset of lactogenesis stage II by postpartum day 3 was not significantly different between the groups. Lactation failure occurred in 5.5% (n=2) participants in the delayed group. Ongoing breastfeeding rates did not differ between the groups, with decreasing rates of any/exclusive breastfeeding over the first postpartum year. Most people continued to use the implant at 12 months, which did not differ by group. CONCLUSION: Delivery room insertion of the contraceptive etonogestrel implant does not delay the onset of lactogenesis when compared with initiation later in the birth-hospitalization and therefore should be offered routinely as part of person-centered postpartum contraceptive counseling, regardless of breastfeeding intentions.

Reversible median nerve neuropathy and local muscle irritation resulting from blind removal attempts of etonogestrel contraceptive implant: a case report.

Nexplanon is an etonogestrel contraceptive implant that comes with an applicator, making it easier to insert and remove. Complications related to insertion and removal procedures, such as neural-vascular injuries, are rare. We describe a case of reversible median nerve neuropathy and local muscle irritation resulting from blind removal attempts of an iatrogenically migrated implant. The patient presented with an unusual pain at the surgical site along with abnormal sensations and numbness in her left hand that worsened after blind attempts to remove the implant. Radiographs revealed that the rod was 3 cm from her insertion scar and deeply embedded in her left arm. The patient then underwent left arm exploration and implant removal under fluoroscopic guidance by an orthopedic surgeon. The rod was placed intramuscularly, adjacent to the median nerve under the basilic vein. The abnormal sensations and numbness in her left hand could be attributed to median nerve involvement, while the atypical pain at the surgical site could be a result of local irritation from the intramuscularly migrated implant from attempts at removal. The symptoms gradually resolved after surgery. This indicates that patients with impalpable contraceptive implants should be referred for implant removal by specialists familiar with the procedure to prevent further deterioration of adjacent structures from iatrogenic implant migration.

Considerations in Adolescent Use of the Etonogestrel Subdermal Implant: A Cohort Study.

Objectives: To describe bleeding patterns and other side effects in adolescent implant users and characterize their impact on early discontinuation of the implant. Study Design: This is a retrospective cohort study of female patients under 18 years who had an implant placed from 2013 to 2018. Data were collected on demographics, medical history, and side effects. Results: Of 212 adolescents, the average age at insertion was 16 years and 84% desired placement for contraception. Common side effects included AUB (80%), mood changes (10%), and perceived weight gain (9%). Most (76%) used the implant for at least 12 months. Average time to removal was 22.1 months (SD 13.0 months) and this did not depend on presence of side effects. Twenty-seven percent of teens were able to achieve amenorrhea. Adolescents with frequent or prolonged bleeding were more likely to have implant removal prior to 12 months than those with other bleeding patterns (p = 0.003). Early removal was also more common in girls reporting weight or mood issues than those who did not (p < 0.001 and p = 0.045, respectively). BMI increased in 64% of adolescents. Average percentage change in BMI was 3.2% (0.87 kg/m2). There was no difference in baseline use of any mood-modulating medications in patients who did and did not complain of mood side effects following implant placement (p = 0.801). Conclusion: Characterization of bleeding patterns following implant placement in adolescents have not previously been reported. Prolonged or heavy bleeding, mood issues, and perceived weight gain were associated with earlier removal of the implant. A relatively small number had early removal of the implant due to weight or mood complaints. Therefore, a history of obesity, depression, or other mood disorders should not be a deterrent to implant placement.

Effects of the etonogestrel contraceptive implant (Implanon®) on bone metabolism during lactation: a prospective study.

AIM: To evaluate the effects of the etonogestrel contraceptive implant (Implanon®) on bone metabolism in lactating women using markers for bone formation and resorption. STUDY DESIGN: This single-centre, prospective cohort study was conducted in Turgut Ozal University Medical Faculty Obstetrics and Gynecology Department with healthy lactating women aged between 24 and 38 years to compare the effect on bone metabolism of 6 months' use of either the implant or a non-hormonal contraceptive method. The study group (n=25) used an implant and the control group (n=25) used a non-hormonal contraceptive intrauterine device inserted 40 days' postpartum. Bone metabolism differences at the time of insertion and after 6 months were assessed quantitatively by biochemical analysis of serum and urine samples. RESULTS: At baseline, serum levels of bone metabolism parameters were similar for the two groups. In the implant group, serum alkaline phosphatase (ALP) levels decreased (p=0.004) and total protein levels increased (p=0.045) at 6 months. In the control group, serum levels of bone metabolism parameters did not change at 6 months compared to baseline. However, serum levels of phosphorus (p=0.013) and ALP (p=0.003) decreased at 6 months compared to baseline. CONCLUSION: Six months' postpartum use of Implanon was found to have no deleterious impact on bone turnover in healthy lactating women.

Difficult removal of subdermal contraceptive implants: a multidisciplinary approach involving a peripheral nerve expert.

OBJECTIVES: We aim to describe our experiences and identify patients who may benefit from referral to a peripheral nerve surgeon for removal of contraceptive subdermal implants in which neurovascular injury may occur, and describe a treatment pathway for optimal care. STUDY DESIGN: We reviewed the charts of 22 patients who were referred to the Division of Family Planning for difficult removal of etonogestrel contraceptive implants between January 1, 2014, and April, 1 2016. Of these, five were referred to a peripheral nerve surgeon due to pain or location of the implant. We evaluated and described these cases and, from our findings, developed recommendations for care in a multidisciplinary team approach. RESULTS: Two patients reported pain, including one with four previous failed removal attempts. In the two patients with pain, the implants were adherent to a sensory nerve. In another, the implant was within the biceps muscle and difficult to locate. In all cases, ultrasound imaging, general anesthesia and a wide exposure allowed for safe removal and good outcomes. Our multidisciplinary care approach has elucidated important referral and technical considerations that improve patient care and safety. CONCLUSION: When necessary, multidisciplinary care with a Family Planning expert and possibly a peripheral nerve surgeon may be beneficial in safely removing etonogestrel contraceptive implants that would be difficult or risky to remove in an ambulatory setting.