Intrauterine device-related uterine perforation incidence and risk (APEX-IUD): a large multisite cohort study

Characterisation and validation of lactation information from structured electronic health records for use in pharmacoepidemiological studies

BACKGROUND

Breastfeeding information stored within electronic health records (EHR) has recently been used for pharmacoepidemiological research, however the data are primarily collected for clinical care.

OBJECTIVES

To characterise breastfeeding information recorded in structured fields in EHR during infant and postpartum health care visits, and to assess the validity of lactation status based on EHR data versus maternal report at research study visits.

METHODS

We assessed breastfeeding information recorded in structured fields in EHR from one health system for a subset of 211 patients who were also enrolled in a study on breast milk composition between 2014 and 2017 that required participants to exclusively breastfeed their infants until at least 1 month of age. We assessed the frequency of breastfeeding information in EHR during the first 12 months of age and compared lactation status based on EHR with maternal report at 1 and 6-month study visits (reference standard).

RESULTS

The median number of breastfeeding records in the EHR per infant was six (interquartile range 3) with most observations clustering in the first few weeks of life and around well-infant visits. At the 6-month study visit, 93.8% of participants were breastfeeding and 80.1% were exclusively breastfeeding according to maternal report. Sensitivity of EHR data for identifying ever breastfeeding was at or near 100%, and sensitivity for identifying ever exclusive breastfeeding was 98.0% (95% CI: 95.0%, 99.2%). Sensitivities were 97.3% (95% CI: 93.9%, 98.9%) for identifying any breastfeeding and 94.4% (95% CI: 89.7%, 97.0%) for exclusive breastfeeding, and positive predictive values were 99.5% (95% CI: 97.0%, 99.9%) for any breastfeeding and 95.0% (95% CI: 90.4%, 97.4%) for exclusive breastfeeding.

CONCLUSIONS

Breastfeeding information in structured EHR fields have the potential to accurately classify lactation status. The validity of these data should be assessed in populations with a lower breastfeeding prevalence.

Laparoscopic management of bowel perforation secondary to levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device migration: a case report and review of literature

Bowel perforation secondary to a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device is exceptionally rare. We present the case of a woman who exhibited abnormal findings during a colonoscopy examination. Despite undergoing an intrauterine device (IUD) insertion procedure for contraception in 2000, attempts for its removal in 2007 were unsuccessful due to the inability to locate the IUD. In 2022, she presented with intermittent hematochezia and lower left abdominal pain. Subsequent colonoscopy and abdominal computed tomography confirmed the presence of the IUD penetrating the uterine wall and entering the colon. Laparoscopic anterior resection was performed, and the patient's postoperative recovery was uneventful, indicating the viability of laparoscopic treatment as a valuable option.

Social Determinants of Health and Patient-Reported Difficult Discontinuation of Long-Acting Reversible Contraception

Background: Some individuals who receive long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) face barriers to discontinuation. The inability to discontinue a contraceptive method when desired negatively impacts a person's reproductive autonomy. Persons impacted by social determinants of health (SDH) may be disproportionately affected. The objective of this study is to evaluate the association of SDH with patient-reported difficult LARC discontinuation. Methods: A retrospective cross-sectional analysis of data from the 2017-2019 cycle of the National Survey of Family Growth was conducted. The main outcome was patient-reported difficulty discontinuing a LARC method (intrauterine device or implant) in the last 10 years. Descriptive statistics were used to identify demographic characteristics and SDH domains. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to estimate associations across SDH domains with difficult LARC removal. Results: A total of 754 respondents reported wanting to have their LARC removed, and 105 (11%) reported difficulty discontinuing LARC methods. One-third of respondents experienced one or more SDH, notably food insecurity (26%) or transportation barriers (30%). After adjusting for age, race, education, geographic location, parity, and body mass index (BMI), persons with one or more SDH had an increased adjusted odds ratio (aOR) for difficultly discontinuing LARCs compared with respondents without any SDH (2.11; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.21, 3.69). Transportation barriers demonstrated the largest aOR of 2.90 (95% CI: 1.07, 7.87). Conclusions: SDH are associated with challenges to LARC discontinuation. SDH are unique risk factors that can impact one's entire contraceptive experience. A nuanced discussion of SDH at the time of contraceptive counseling may be a critical step in addressing the intersectionality of method selection and reproductive agency.

A Displaced Intrauterine Device Eroding Into the Sigmoid Colon

A 36-year-old female presented to the gynecology office eight weeks after the placement of a ParaGard intrauterine device (IUD). Upon gynecologic examination, the strings of the IUD were not found. Magnetic resonance imaging was performed which reported the IUD embedded in the sigmoid colon. Initial diagnostic laparoscopy was done without bowel preparation and revealed an IUD embedded within the sigmoid colon and mesocolon. Colonoscopy did not reveal any breach of the colonic lumen. A second diagnostic laparoscopy was planned with the robotic-assisted technique after bowel preparation. Intraoperative findings during the second operation identified the IUD embedded in the antimesenteric side of the sigmoid colon with surrounding scar tissue to the uterus. The IUD was sharply freed using robotic scissors and the resulting serosal defect was sutured in layers with buttress made of appendices epiploica. The patient recovered well and had an excellent outcome. Our article highlights the minimally invasive method of dealing with a displaced IUD. The use of the robotic technique was helpful in our case to achieve an excellent outcome.

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.

Missed Diagnosis of Perforation and Intraperitoneal Migration of an Intrauterine Device and Its Management in a Resource-Limited Setting: A Case Report

Background

The intrauterine device is a popular and highly effective form of long-acting reversible contraception. Although generally safe, complications could happen. One of the most serious complications of intrauterine device use is uterine perforation. Risk factors for perforation include, but are not limited to, postpartum period, breastfeeding, levels of experience, and excessive force exerted during insertion. This case is significant because it demonstrates risk factors for uterine perforation, how to handle missing strings, and care in places with little resources.

Case Presentation

We discuss the case of a 27-year-old black Ethiopian woman who presented with chronic pelvic pain and had a perforated intrauterine device discovered in the cul-de-sac. The device had been inserted at six weeks postpartum. The client was unable to feel the strings three months after insertion, and a wrong diagnosis of expulsion was made. After one year of insertion, the intrauterine device was located on a plain abdominal radiograph and removed via laparotomy without complications.

Conclusion

Although uterine perforation is a rare complication of intrauterine device insertion, special attention should be paid to women with risk factors. In the absence of a witnessed expulsion, assessments and investigations should be carried out before declaring a device expelled. In patients with chronic pelvic pain complaints in the presence of an intrauterine device, perforation and migration outside the uterine cavity should be considered. Abdominal X-rays and laparotomies can be used to find and manage extrauterine migrating devices in environments with limited resources.

Descriptive study of the real-world, long-term cost estimates and duration of use for hormonal and nonhormonal intrauterine devices using US commercial insurance claims

BACKGROUND

Intrauterine devices (IUDs) have comparable efficacy to permanent surgical contraceptive methods; however, long-term costs are infrequently considered. Existing estimates inconsistently account for costs outside of IUD insertion or removal, actual duration of use, or differences between hormonal and nonhormonal IUDs.

OBJECTIVE

To describe health care resource utilization and commercial payer costs that arise throughout hormonal and nonhormonal IUD use.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, paid claims data (Merative, MarketScan) from a large US commercial claims database were evaluated between 2013 and 2019. Claims were included from individuals aged 12 to 45 years who had an IUD inserted in 2014, continuous insurance coverage for 1 year prior to insertion and throughout follow-up, and no insertion, removal, or reinsertion in the previous year. Procedures and services that could be IUD-related were identified using Current Procedural Terminology and International Classification of Diseases, Ninth and Tenth Edition codes. Duration of IUD use was evaluated by Kaplan-Meier analysis of time to IUD removal. Event rates were determined for identified procedures and services; costs were calculated as the sum of payer reimbursements per enrolled individual. All IUD types available during the study period were described: 2 hormonal IUDs (52-mg and 13.5-mg levonorgestrel-releasing [LNG]) and the nonhormonal (380-mm2 copper) IUD.

RESULTS

Of 195,009 individuals meeting the age requirement and receiving an IUD in 2014, 63,386 met the inclusion criteria and 53,744 had their IUD type on record-42,777 (67.5%) 52-mg LNG, 2,932 (4.6%) 13.5-mg LNG, and 8,035 (12.7%) nonhormonal IUD users. Despite differences in their indicated duration (13.5-mg LNG, 3 years; 52-mg LNG, 5 years; and nonhormonal, 10 years), most individuals had their IUD removed before its indicated full duration of use (13.5-mg LNG, 56.1%; 52-mg LNG, 61.3%; nonhormonal [at 5 years], 54.6%). The event rate per 100 individuals during the follow-up period was highest for abnormal uterine bleeding (16.2), ovarian cysts (9.3), and surgical management of uterine perforations (4.5). IUD insertion costs (mean ± SE) per enrolled individual for the 13.5-mg LNG, 52-mg LNG, and nonhormonal IUDs were $931 ± $9, $1,107 ± $4, and $897 ± $6, respectively. Cumulative mean ± SE 5-year postinsertion costs for the 13.5-mg LNG, 52-mg LNG, and nonhormonal IUDs were $2,892 ± $232, $1,514 ± $31, and $1,389 ± $97, respectively, among the remaining enrolled individuals.

CONCLUSIONS

In this descriptive study of commercially insured IUD users, at least half had their IUD removed before its indicated duration. IUD improvements that reduce the frequency of abnormal uterine bleeding, ovarian cysts, and uterine perforations may help reduce long-term IUD costs.

Cyclical endometrial repair and regeneration: Molecular mechanisms, diseases, and therapeutic interventions

The endometrium is a unique human tissue with an extraordinary ability to undergo a hormone-regulated cycle encompassing shedding, bleeding, scarless repair, and regeneration throughout the female reproductive cycle. The cyclical repair and regeneration of the endometrium manifest as changes in endometrial epithelialization, glandular regeneration, and vascularization. The mechanisms encompass inflammation, coagulation, and fibrinolytic system balance. However, specific conditions such as endometriosis or TCRA treatment can disrupt the process of cyclical endometrial repair and regeneration. There is uncertainty about traditional clinical treatments' efficacy and side effects, and finding new therapeutic interventions is essential. Researchers have made substantial progress in the perspective of regenerative medicine toward maintaining cyclical endometrial repair and regeneration in recent years. Such progress encompasses the integration of biomaterials, tissue-engineered scaffolds, stem cell therapies, and 3D printing. This review analyzes the mechanisms, diseases, and interventions associated with cyclical endometrial repair and regeneration. The review discusses the advantages and disadvantages of the regenerative interventions currently employed in clinical practice. Additionally, it highlights the significant advantages of regenerative medicine in this domain. Finally, we review stem cells and biologics among the available interventions in regenerative medicine, providing insights into future therapeutic strategies.

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.

Prenatal Contraceptive Counseling

Pregnancy care should include open discussions with patients about their ideal family size and pregnancy spacing. With these patient-voiced goals in mind, clinicians should review contraceptive tools to meet these goals, including special considerations after birth. For patients that desire contraception, it is important to prioritize the provision of their chosen method as soon as safely possible and desired after birth.

Complications of Long-Acting Reversible Contraceptive Modalities

ABSTRACT

Long-acting reversible contraception has risen in popularity in recent decades and is becoming one of the more common modalities of contraception in the United States, with a growing adolescent population among its users. The 2 modalities of long-acting reversible contraception-intrauterine devices and subcutaneous hormonal implants/etonogestrel implants (referred to as Nexplanon in the US)-are beneficial for their excellent effectiveness, ease of use, and safety profile. This article reviews the pharmacology of these modalities, common complications and their presentations, and the initial evaluation and management in the pediatric emergency department setting. Where applicable, attention will be paid to problems unique to the adolescent population.

Early vs Interval Postpartum Intrauterine Device Placement: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

The early postpartum period, 2 to 4 weeks after birth, may be a convenient time for intrauterine device (IUD) placement; the placement could then coincide with early postpartum or well-baby visits.

Objective

To determine expulsion rates for IUDs placed early postpartum compared with those placed at the standard interval 6-week visit.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this randomized noninferiority trial, people who had a vaginal or cesarean birth were randomly assigned to undergo early (14-28 days) or interval (42-56 days) postpartum IUD placement. Clinicians blinded to participant study group used transvaginal ultrasonography to confirm IUD presence and position at the 6-month postpartum follow-up. The study assessed 642 postpartum people from 4 US medical centers, enrolled a consecutive sample of 404 participants from March 2018 to July 2021, and followed up each participant for 6 months postpartum.

Interventions

Early postpartum IUD placement, at 2 to 4 weeks postpartum, vs standard interval placement 6 to 8 weeks postpartum.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was complete IUD expulsion by 6 months postpartum; the prespecified noninferiority margin was 6%. Secondary outcomes were partial IUD expulsion, IUD removal, pelvic infection, patient satisfaction, uterine perforation, pregnancy, and IUD use at 6 months postpartum. IUD malposition was an exploratory outcome.

Results

Among 404 enrolled participants, 203 participants were randomly assigned to undergo early IUD placement and 201 to undergo interval IUD placement (mean [SD] age, 29.9 [5.4] years; 46 [11.4%] were Black, 228 [56.4%] were White, and 175 [43.3%] were Hispanic). By 6 months postpartum, 53 participants (13%) never had an IUD placed and 57 (14%) were lost to follow-up. Among the 294 participants (73%) who received an IUD and completed 6-month follow-up, complete expulsion rates were 3 of 149 (2.0% [95% CI, 0.4%-5.8%]) in the early placement group and 0 of 145 (0% [95% CI, 0.0%-2.5%]) in the interval placement group (between-group difference, 2.0 [95% CI, -0.5 to 5.7] percentage points). Partial expulsion occurred in 14 (9.4% [95% CI, 5.2%-15.3%]) participants in the early placement group and 11 (7.6% [95% CI, 3.9%-13.2%]) participants in the interval placement group (between-group difference, 1.8 [95% CI, -4.8 to 8.6] percentage points). IUD use at 6 months was similar between the groups: 141 (69.5% [95% CI, 62.6%-75.7%]) participants in the early group vs 139 (67.2% [95% CI, 60.2%-73.6%]) in the interval group.

Conclusions and Relevance

Early IUD placement at 2 to 4 weeks postpartum compared with 6 to 8 weeks postpartum was noninferior for complete expulsion, but not partial expulsion. Understanding the risk of expulsion at these time points may help patients and clinicians make informed choices about the timing of IUD placement.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03462758.

Perforation During Gynecological Procedures

This article in the Women’s Health series discusses uterine perforation occurring during gynecological procedures, including prevention, identification of risk factors, recognition, management, and long-term outcomes.

Efficacy and safety of intrauterine device placement during a planned cesarean section

Objective

Approximately 79% of pregnancies conceived within the first year after delivery are unintended and 50% of the couples report having unprotected intercourse before the first routine postpartum appointment. Unintended pregnancies are associated with unsafe abortions and other poor outcomes. We aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of intrauterine device (IUD) placement during a planned cesarean section (CS) at one year after insertion.

Study Design

A survey-based retrospective cohort study conducted at a university teaching hospital. The study cohort included term pregnant women delivered by a planned CS between December 2016 and July 2020, and data collection and questionnaires were completed in July 2021. In the study group, copper or Levonorgestrel IUDs were placed through the uterine incision after delivery of the fetus and placenta, while women in the control group did not receive an IUD. Other perioperative managements were similar. The primary outcome was unintended pregnancy rate during the first year after delivery.

Results

The study comprised a total of 150 women, with 50 and 100 in the study and control groups, respectively. None of the women in the study group became pregnant, compared with nine (9%) in the controls (p = 0.03), of them eight (88.9%) were unplanned. Perioperative outcome was comparable between groups. The rate of contraceptive use one year after delivery was significantly higher in the study group compared to the control group (86.0% vs. 35.0%, respectively, p < 0.001).

Conclusion

IUD placement during CS is effective in preventing unintended pregnancies within the first year after delivery, with operative outcomes unaffected.

Implications

Intrauterine device (IUD) placement during a planned cesarean section prevented unintended pregnancies within one year after birth. Additionally, the rate of contraceptive use at one year was significantly higher compared to women who elected not to have an IUD inserted during the cesarean. IUD placement did not affect perioperative outcomes.

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.