Risks of Uterine Perforation and Expulsion Associated With Intrauterine Devices.

OBJECTIVE: The APEX-IUD (Association of Perforation and Expulsion of Intrauterine Devices) study evaluated the association of postpartum timing of intrauterine device (IUD) insertion, breastfeeding, heavy menstrual bleeding, and IUD type (levonorgestrel-releasing vs copper) with risks of uterine perforation and IUD expulsion in usual clinical practice. We summarize the clinically important findings to inform counseling and shared decision making. METHODS: APEX-IUD was a real-world (using U.S. health care data) retrospective cohort study of individuals aged 50 years and younger with IUD insertions between 2001 and 2018 and with electronic health record data. Cumulative incidences of uterine perforation and IUD expulsion were calculated. Adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) and 95% CIs were estimated from proportional hazards models with control of confounding. RESULTS: Among the study population of 326,658, absolute risk of uterine perforation was low overall (cumulative incidence, 0.21% [95% CI 0.19-0.23%] at 1 year and 0.61% [95% CI 0.56-0.66% at 5 years]) but was elevated for IUDs inserted during time intervals within 1 year postpartum, particularly among those between 4 days and 6 weeks postpartum (aHR 6.71, 95% CI 4.80-9.38), relative to nonpostpartum insertions. Among postpartum insertions, IUD expulsion risk was greatest for insertions in the immediate postpartum period (0-3 days after delivery) compared with nonpostpartum (aHR 5.34, 95% CI 4.47-6.39). Postpartum individuals who were breastfeeding had a slightly elevated risk of perforation and lowered risk of expulsion than those not breastfeeding. Among nonpostpartum individuals, those with a heavy menstrual bleeding diagnosis were at greater risk of expulsion than those without (aHR 2.84, 95% CI 2.66-3.03); heavy menstrual bleeding also was associated with a slightly elevated perforation risk. There was a slightly elevated perforation risk and slightly lower expulsion risk associated with levonorgestrel-releasing IUDs compared with copper IUDs. CONCLUSION: Absolute risk of adverse outcomes with IUD insertion is low. Clinicians should be aware of the differences in risks of uterine perforation and expulsion associated with IUD insertion during specific postpartum time periods and with a heavy menstrual bleeding diagnosis. This information should be incorporated into counseling and decision making for patients considering IUD insertion. FUNDING SOURCE: Bayer AG. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: EU PAS register, EUPAS33461.

Utilisation, effectiveness, and safety of immediate postpartum intrauterine device insertion: a systematic literature review.

BACKGROUND: Intrauterine devices (IUDs) are highly effective contraception. IUDs inserted directly following delivery provide immediate birth control and may decrease unintended pregnancies, including short-interval pregnancies, thereby mitigating health risks and associated economic burden. METHODS: This systematic literature review included published global data on the utilisation, effectiveness, and safety of postpartum intrauterine devices (PPIUDs) of any type. English language articles indexed in MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane from January 2010-October 2021 were included. RESULTS: 133 articles met the inclusion criteria (46% interventional studies; 54% observational; n=87 from lower-income countries; n=46 from higher-income countries). PPIUD use was low in higher-income countries (6/10 000 US deliveries in 2013-2016) and varied widely in lower-income countries (2%-46%). Across both higher- and lower-income countries, in most studies (79%), >80% of women with PPIUDs had an IUD in place by 3 months; at 6 and 12 months, 76% and 54% of included studies reported that >80% of women had an IUD in place; reason for discontinuation was infrequently reported. Pregnancies were rare (96 pregnancies across 12 191 women from 37 studies reporting data) and were generally unrelated to device failure, but rather occurred in women no longer using a PPIUD. Expulsions occurred mainly in the early outpatient period and ranged widely (within 3 months: 0-41%). Abnormal bleeding, infections, or perforations were rare. CONCLUSIONS: PPIUDs are safe and effective. Long-term follow-up data are limited. Future research elucidating reasons underlying lack of PPIUD use is warranted.

Demographic, Reproductive, and Medical Risk Factors for Intrauterine Device Expulsion.

OBJECTIVE: To explore to what extent intrauterine device (IUD) expulsion is associated with demographic and clinical risk factors. METHODS: The APEX-IUD (Association of Perforation and Expulsion of IntraUterine Devices) study was a U.S. cohort study using electronic health records from three integrated health care systems (Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Southern California, and Washington) and a health care information exchange (Regenstrief Institute). These analyses included individuals aged 50 years or younger with IUD insertions from 2001 to 2018. Intrauterine device expulsion cumulative incidence and incidence rates were estimated. Using Cox regression models, hazard ratios with 95% CIs were estimated before and after adjustment for risk factors of interest (age, race and ethnicity, parity, body mass index [BMI], heavy menstrual bleeding, and dysmenorrhea) and potential confounders. RESULTS: In total, 228,834 individuals with IUD insertion and no delivery in the previous 52 weeks were identified (184,733 [80.7%] with levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system). Diagnosis of heavy menstrual bleeding-particularly a diagnosis in both recent and past periods-was the strongest risk factor for IUD expulsion. Categories with the highest risk of IUD expulsion within each risk factor included individuals diagnosed with overweight, obesity, and morbid obesity; those in younger age groups, especially among those aged 24 years or younger; and in those with parity of four or more. Non-Hispanic White individuals had the lowest incidence and risk, and after adjustment, Asian or Pacific Islander individuals had the highest risk. Dysmenorrhea was not independently associated with expulsion risk when adjusting for heavy menstrual bleeding. CONCLUSION: Most risk factors for expulsion identified in this study appear consistent with known physiologic factors that affect uterine anatomy and physiology (age, BMI, heavy menstrual bleeding, parity). The increased risk of IUD expulsion among individuals of color warrants further investigation. Intrauterine devices are an effective long-term contraceptive; expulsion is uncommon, but patients should be counseled accordingly. FUNDING SOURCE: Bayer AG. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: EU PAS register, EUPAS33461.

Contraceptive efficacy and safety of the 52-mg levonorgestrel intrauterine system for up to 8 years: findings from the Mirena Extension Trial.

BACKGROUND: The 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system is an established, long-acting contraceptive option with approved use for up to 7 years. OBJECTIVE: The Mirena Extension Trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of the 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system during extended use beyond 5 and up to 8 years. STUDY DESIGN: This was a multicenter, single-arm study in the United States, enrolling existing users of the 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system, aged 18 to 35 years, who have had the system for 4.5 to 5 years. We assessed the contraceptive efficacy (Pearl Index) and cumulative failure rate (using the Kaplan-Meier method) of the 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system during extended use. We also evaluated bleeding outcomes and adverse events. RESULTS: Of the 362 participants starting year 6, 243 entered and 223 completed 8 years of 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system use. Just more than half the participants were parous. The mean (standard deviation) age was 29.2 (±2.9) years, and all participants were aged ≤36 years at the end of year 8. Two pregnancies occurred, both with the device in situ. The year 6 pregnancy was of undetermined location and resolved spontaneously. The pregnancy in year 7 was ectopic and resolved with methotrexate treatment. In both cases, the 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system was removed and the participants left the trial. For years 6 to 8, the 3-year Pearl Index (95% confidence interval) was 0.28 (0.03-1.00) with a 3-year cumulative failure rate of 0.68% (0.17-2.71). Pearl Indexes for years 6, 7, and 8 were 0.34 (0.01-1.88), 0.40 (0.01-2.25), and 0.00 (0.00-1.90), respectively. The 3-year (years 6-8) ectopic pregnancy Pearl Index was 0.14 (0.00-0.77). We found treatment-emergent adverse events in 249 of 362 participants (68.8%), with 65 (18.0%) events considered to be related to the 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system. The discontinuation rate was 38.4% (139/362), most commonly because of desire for pregnancy (12.2%, 44/362). During extended use beyond 5 years and up to 8 years, participants reported a decrease in the mean number of bleeding or spotting days with approximately half of the women experiencing amenorrhea or infrequent bleeding. We did not enroll a sufficient number of women using the 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system for contraception and heavy menstrual bleeding to assess extended use for that indication. At the end of year 8, most (98.7%, 220/223) of the participants who completed the study remained satisfied with the continued use of the 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system. Of the 31 women who discontinued early because of desire for pregnancy with evaluable data for return-to-fertility analysis, 24 reported a posttreatment pregnancy within 1 year, giving a 12-month return-to-fertility rate of 77.4%. CONCLUSION: The 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system, initially approved for 5 years, maintains high contraceptive efficacy, user satisfaction, and a favorable safety profile through 8 years of use. Participants reported 26 posttreatment pregnancies in total, of which 24 occurred in women who had discontinued the 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system because of a desire for pregnancy. Of note, among women who elected to continue use through 8 years, bleeding patterns remained highly favorable. These findings support continued 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system use for up to 8 years in women who wish to continue treatment.

Association between intrauterine device type and risk of perforation and device expulsion: results from the Association of Perforation and Expulsion of Intrauterine Device study.

BACKGROUND: Intrauterine devices, including levonorgestrel-releasing and copper devices, are highly effective long-acting reversible contraceptives. The potential risks associated with intrauterine devices are low and include uterine perforation and device expulsion. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the risk of perforation and expulsion associated with levonorgestrel-releasing devices vs copper devices in clinical practice in the United States. STUDY DESIGN: The Association of Perforation and Expulsion of Intrauterine Device study was a retrospective cohort study of women aged ≤50 years with an intrauterine device insertion during 2001 to 2018 and information on intrauterine device type and patient and medical characteristics. Of note, 4 research sites with access to electronic health records contributed data for the study: 3 Kaiser Permanente-integrated healthcare systems (Northern California, Southern California, and Washington) and 1 healthcare system using data from a healthcare information exchange in Indiana (Regenstrief Institute). Perforation was classified as any extension of the device into or through the myometrium. Expulsion was classified as complete (not visible in the uterus or abdomen or patient reported) or partial (any portion in the cervix or malpositioned). We estimated the crude incidence rates and crude cumulative incidence by intrauterine device type. The risks of perforation and expulsion associated with levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine devices vs copper intrauterine devices were estimated using Cox proportional-hazards regression with propensity score overlap weighting to adjust for confounders. RESULTS: Among 322,898 women included in this analysis, the incidence rates of perforation per 1000 person-years were 1.64 (95% confidence interval, 1.53-1.76) for levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine devices and 1.27 (95% confidence interval, 1.08-1.48) for copper intrauterine devices; 1-year and 5-year crude cumulative incidence was 0.22% (95% confidence interval, 0.20-0.24) and 0.63% (95% confidence interval, 0.57-0.68) for levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine devices and 0.16% (95% confidence interval, 0.13-0.20) and 0.55% (95% confidence interval, 0.44-0.68) for copper intrauterine devices, respectively. The incidence rates of expulsion per 1000 person-years were 13.95 (95% confidence interval, 13.63-14.28) for levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine devices and 14.08 (95% confidence interval, 13.44-14.75) for copper intrauterine devices; 1-year and 5-year crude cumulative incidence was 2.30% (95% confidence interval, 2.24-2.36) and 4.52% (95% confidence interval, 4.40-4.65) for levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine devices and 2.30% (95% confidence interval, 2.18-2.44) and 4.82 (95% confidence interval, 4.56-5.10) for copper intrauterine devices, respectively. Comparing levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine devices with copper intrauterine devices, the adjusted hazard ratios were 1.49 (95% confidence intervals, 1.25-1.78) for perforation and 0.69 (95% confidence intervals, 0.65-0.73) for expulsion. CONCLUSION: After adjusting for potential confounders, levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine devices were associated with an increased risk of uterine perforation and a decreased risk of expulsion relative to copper intrauterine devices. Given that the absolute numbers of these events are low in both groups, these differences may not be clinically meaningful.

Outcome of pregnancies after pelvic artery embolization for postpartum hemorrhage: retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: The effects of pelvic artery embolization (PAE) for postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) on subsequent pregnancies have been explored in small case series and one case-control study by mailed questionnaire with uncomplicated pregnancies as controls. We conducted a single-center retrospective cohort study using women with PPH without PAE for comparison. STUDY DESIGN: From a cohort of 103 women undergoing PAE for primary PPH between January 1999 and December 2012 (exposed) and 189 pregnancies with PPH not requiring PAE between January 2008 and December 2012 (unexposed), we queried the electronic medical records for readmissions to labor and delivery in subsequent years. Outcomes of subsequent pregnancies continuing past 20 weeks were obtained by chart review. RESULTS: Repeat pregnancies were documented in 17 of 103 exposed women (16.5%) and 18 of 189 unexposed women (9.5%). At delivery complicated by PPH, the groups did not differ in demographics, gestational age, units of blood transfused, or PPH cause. At the time of subsequent deliveries, there was a greater interdelivery interval in women exposed to PAE than those unexposed (1710 ± 938 days vs 904 ± 358 days; P = .002), and the 2 groups were similar in terms of gestational age and birthweight. However, there was a significantly higher rate of placenta accreta in exposed than unexposed women (23.5 % vs 0%; P = .04), with 3 of 17 sustaining total abdominal hysterectomy and 1 requiring repeat PAE for severe PPH. CONCLUSION: Pregnancies following PAE for PPH were more likely than those not receiving PAE for treatment to be complicated by placenta accreta. Pregnancies following PAE should be followed up for imaging evidence of placenta accreta.