Localization and management of nonpalpable radiopaque contraceptive implant

Nonpalpable implant removals at centre of experience in France: a cohort study

OBJECTIVE(S)

Management and localisation strategies to remove nonpalpable contraceptive implants may be difficult. We aimed to evaluate our imaging modalities to identify deep implant and patient outcomes related to removal.

STUDY DESIGN

In this retrospective study, we reviewed all cases referred to our specialised centre for nonpalpable contraceptive implants from January 2018 to August 2022.

RESULTS

Out of the cohort studied, 47 female subjects exhibited nonpalpable implants. The implant was nonpalpable for thirty-six patients (76,6%) immediately after the insertion whereas it was not palpable several months after the insertion for eleven patients (23.4%). Twelve patients (25.5%) had one or more failed removal attempts before referral.All 47 implants were successfully visualised via ultrasound in the upper arm: 40 implants (85.1%) were located in the subdermal tissue, 4 (8.5%) were intrafascial and 3 (6.4%) were intramuscular. Depth of the implant was 4.0 mm [1.7 - 12.0]. No clinical factors were statistically associated with differences in depth or location (subdermal vs subfascial). Removal procedures were mainly under local anaesthesia in 74.5% of cases in an outpatient setting. There were two Clavien-Dindo grade 1 complications (one case of cutaneous scar dehiscence and one transient postoperative neuropathic complaint in the upper arm resolved within 3 months under analgetics).

CONCLUSIONS

Identification of deep implants requires following the ultrasound modality protocol. Ultrasound detection makes easy and safe implant removal. Training programs for the insertion as well as for the removal of correct and incorrect inserted implants should be continued and developed all around the world.

Pilot study of a novel, alternative subdermal scapular insertion site for the etonogestrel contraceptive implant

OBJECTIVES

To assess the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the etonogestrel (ENG) contraceptive implant when inserted at an alternative scapular site.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a pilot study of healthy, reproductive-age females who underwent subdermal insertion of an ENG implant over the inferior edge of the nondominant scapula (scapular insertion). We measured serum ENG levels over 1 year at nine time points. Participants completed questionnaires on insertion site and bleeding side effects. We collected photographs and video recordings of insertion and removal techniques.

RESULTS

We enrolled five participants (as prespecified), their median age was 26.0 years (range: 19.6-30.3), and median body mass index was 25.0 kg/m2 (range: 22.0-28.0). All serum ENG concentrations remained >90 pg/mL and were within the range of published data for arm insertion of ENG implant at all time points. The mean serum ENG level was 511.7 pg/mL (±168.2) at 1 week and 136.6 pg/mL (±21.8) at 12 months. During the first week after insertion, four of five participants noted insertion site pain with a median pain score of 2 (range 1-3), but all noted resolution by week two. Participants reported variable bleeding patterns consistent with standard ENG implant placement. At the end of the study, all participants reported satisfaction with the implant and would recommend scapular insertion to a friend.

CONCLUSIONS

Scapular insertion of the ENG contraceptive implant has similar pharmacokinetics to arm insertion over 1 year of use. This novel, alternative site was well tolerated and demonstrated similar bleeding side effects to standard arm insertion.

IMPLICATIONS

Subdermal scapular insertion of the etonogestrel contraceptive implant demonstrated similar pharmacokinetics to arm insertion over 1 year of use. Our pilot data support scapular insertion as an alternative site for ENG contraceptive implants, which could be beneficial for certain patient populations.