Ultrasound-guided repositioning technique for partially expelled intrauterine device: descriptive feasibility study.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the feasibility of an ultrasound-guided repositioning technique for partially expelled intrauterine devices (IUDs) without use of sedation. METHODS: This was a descriptive feasibility study of patients with a partially expelled IUD managed in our outpatient clinic from January 2016 to February 2020. The partially expelled IUDs (vertical arm extending partially or entirely through the cervical canal) were repositioned at the uterine fundus using Hartmann alligator forceps under ultrasound guidance. Paracervical or intracervical anesthesia and prophylactic antibiotics were not used. Data related to the procedure and 6-month follow-up were extracted from patient medical records. The primary outcome was the success rate of the repositioning procedure, defined as ultrasound confirmation of the entire IUD located above the internal os. Secondary outcomes included the retention and expulsion rates of the repositioned IUD at 6 months after the procedure and description of complications. RESULTS: We included data from 55 women with a partially expelled IUD (35 levonorgestrel IUDs and 20 copper IUDs) referred for repositioning. Ultrasound-guided repositioning of the IUD was successful in 51 (92.7%) cases, while the procedure was not completed in four patients due to pain. Of the 55 procedures, 48 (87.3%) were performed by obstetrics and gynecology trainees under the supervision of a senior specialist. Among the 51 successfully repositioned IUDs, nine (17.6%) were expelled within 6 months after the procedure and six patients were lost to follow-up. No uterine perforation or infection-related complications occurred within 6 months of the procedure. CONCLUSION: The ultrasound-guided repositioning technique appears to be a safe and feasible approach for partially expelled IUDs. © 2022 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Practical training of health care providers in insertion of contraceptive implants: findings from two Brazilian centres.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Lack of information and myths or inadequate training of health care providers in the guidance and management of contraceptives could negatively affect choice and eventually continuation rates. Our objectives were to evaluate the impact of clinical and theoretical training of health care professionals on insertion and removal of etonogestrel (ENG)-implant regarding this contraceptive, including pre- and post-training knowledge about insertion and removal techniques, clinical characteristics, side effects and outcomes. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study in which a questionnaire was sent to health care providers after they received clinical training in the management of ENG-implant. RESULTS: After training, 78.2% of the 139 participants initiated to offer and inserted up to 5 implants/month and 17.6% between 6 to 10/month. None of the interviewees reported having difficulty with insertions after training, and 87.9% reported feeling very confident for removal. CONCLUSION: Theoretical and practical training appeared important to prepare health care professionals, clarify doubts and promote higher rates of use of contraceptive implants in Brazil, contributing to reduce the rates of unintended pregnancies.