Ectopic pregnancy with postcoital contraception – a case report

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalence and association between levonorgestrel and ectopic pregnancy

BACKGROUND

The use of levonorgestrel emergency oral contraceptives (EOCs) is one of the factors that may be associated with ectopic pregnancy. We aimed to investigate the incidence of ectopic pregnancy in EOC users and the association between EOCs and ectopic pregnancy.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We searched for articles that provided the incidence of and the association between levonorgestrel EOCs and ectopic pregnancy in women of reproductive ages in CINAHL Complete, Medline, OpenDissertations, Scopus, Science Direct, and Thai Journal Online. The risk of bias was assessed by Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies or Risk of Bias 2. A meta-analysis was conducted using the random-effects model.

RESULTS

We retrieved 1839 nonredundant articles from the systematic search. The meta-analysis showed that the prevalence of ectopic pregnancy was not statistically different from zero (pooled prevalence estimate = 0.029%; 95%CI: -0.006, 0.065; N = 9; I2 = 0) and rare. In addition, levonorgestrel EOCs increased the risk of ectopic pregnancy (OR = 6.17; 95%CI: 3.78, 10.08; N = 5; I2 = 43%).

CONCLUSIONS

Women with extrauterine or ectopic pregnancy had higher odds of using levonorgestrel emergency oral contraceptives than those with intrauterine pregnancy. However, the prevalence of ectopic pregnancy is rare.

A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Adverse Effects of Levonorgestrel Emergency Oral Contraceptive

INTRODUCTION

The levonorgestrel oral emergency contraceptive is well tolerated and effective, however its use is still limited, mainly due to safety concerns.

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to summarize current evidence regarding the adverse events, and their prevalence, reported during the use of oral levonorgestrel emergency contraceptives.

METHODS

Four electronic databases and the US FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) Public Dashboard were searched. Studies that reported or investigated safety outcomes or adverse reactions during the use of levonorgestrel as an emergency oral contraceptive were included. Data on study design, demographics of levonorgestrel and the control cohort, and reported adverse effects were extracted.

RESULTS

A total of 47 articles were included in this systematic review, from which it was shown that most of the adverse reactions were common and not serious. Uncommon adverse reactions identified included anorexia, ectopic pregnancy, exanthema, chloasma, miscarriage, and weight gain. Multiple serious adverse events, including convulsion, ectopic pregnancy, febrile neutropenia, stroke, abdominal hernia, anaphylaxis, cancer, ovarian cyst rupture, serious infections, and suicidal ideation, were reported. In addition, the prevalence of adverse events after a levonorgestrel 0.75 mg two-dose regimen and a levonorgestrel 1.5 mg single-dose regimen were not statistically different (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The most common adverse effects of levonorgestrel were not serious. This systematic review shows that data regarding the adverse reactions of repeated use of levonorgestrel are scarce. Studies on the multiple uses of levonorgestrel emergency contraception are still required to ensure its safety.

Reduced prevalence of chronic tubal inflammation in tubal pregnancies after levonorgestrel emergency contraception failure

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare chronic fallopian tubal inflammatory disease and fibrosis between patients with general tubal pregnancy (TP) and TP with levonorgestrel (LNG) emergency contraception (EC) failure.

METHODS

We retrospectively studied patients with general TP (n = 79) and TP following LNG-EC failure (n = 81) within the same conception cycle. Information on the gynecological features of each subject was collected. Pelvic inflammatory disease and associated sequelae were assessed by the serum Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) IgG test, laparoscopic evaluation of tubal damage, and histopathological observation of tube tissues. Chi-square and Student's t-tests were employed to determine the difference between the two groups.

RESULTS

Compared with general TP, cases of TP following LNG-EC failure subjects were less likely to have a history of previous ectopic pregnancy (5.06% vs. 18.52%, p = 0.009) and adnexal surgery (6.33% vs. 22.22%, p = 0.010). Patients with TP following LNG-EC failure were less likely to have pelvic inflammatory disease and associated sequelae than those with general TP, as revealed by positive reaction to anti-CT IgG (18.18% vs. 35.94%, p = 0.031), assessment of tubal damage (grade I: 5.06% vs. 17.28%; grade II: 2.53% vs. 11.11%; grade III: 1.27% vs. 6.17%; p = 0.001), infiltration of chronic inflammatory cells (10.91% vs. 62.50%, p < 0.001), and positive Masson's staining (7.69% vs. 39.58%; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with cases of general TP, cases of TP following LNG-EC failure exhibited reduced rates of CT infection, fallopian tubal inflammation, and/or fibrosis.

Contraceptive Use and the Risk of Ectopic Pregnancy: A Multi-Center Case-Control Study

Objective

To evaluate the association between the risk of ectopic pregnancy (EP) and the use of common contraceptives during the previous and current conception/menstrual cycle.

Methods

A multi-center case-control study was conducted in Shanghai. Women diagnosed with EP were recruited as the case group (n = 2,411). Women with intrauterine pregnancy (IUP) (n = 2,416) and non-pregnant women (n = 2,419) were matched as controls at a ratio of 1∶1. Information regarding the previous and current use of contraceptives was collected. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to calculate odds ratios (ORs) and the corresponding 95% confidential intervals (CIs).

Results

Previous use of intrauterine devices (IUDs) was associated with a slight risk of ectopic pregnancy (AOR₁ = 1.87 [95% CI: 1.48–2.37]; AOR₂ = 1.84 [1.49–2.27]), and the risk increased with the duration of previous use (P₁ for trend <10⁻⁴, P₂ for trend <10⁻⁴). The current use of most contraceptives reduced the risk of both unwanted IUP (condom: AOR = 0.04 [0.03–0.05]; withdrawal method: AOR = 0.10 [0.07–0.13]; calendar rhythm method: AOR = 0.54 [0.40–0.73]; oral contraceptive pills [OCPs]: AOR = 0.03 [0.02–0.08]; levonorgestrel emergency contraception [LNG-EC]: AOR = 0.22 [0.16–0.30]; IUDs: AOR = 0.01 [0.005–0.012]; tubal sterilization: AOR = 0.01 [0.001–0.022]) and unwanted EP (condom: AOR₁ = 0.05 [0.04–0.06]; withdrawal method: AOR₁ = 0.13 [0.09–0.19]; calendar rhythm method: AOR₁ = 0.66 [0.48–0.91]; OCPs: AOR₁ = 0.14 [0.07–0.26]; IUDs: AOR₁ = 0.17 [0.13–0.22]; tubal sterilization: AOR₁ = 0.04 [0.02–0.08]). However, when contraception failed and pregnancy occurred, current use of OCPs (AOR₂ = 4.06 [1.64–10.07]), LNG-EC (AOR₂ = 4.87 [3.88–6.10]), IUDs (AOR₂ = 21.08 [13.44–33.07]), and tubal sterilization (AOR₂ = 7.68 [1.69–34.80]) increased the risk of EP compared with the non-use of contraceptives.

Conclusion

Current use of most contraceptives reduce the risk of both IUP and EP. However, if the contraceptive method fails, the proportions of EP may be higher than those of non-users. In the case of contraceptive failure in the current cycle, EP cases should be differentiated according to current use of OCPs, LNG-EC, IUDs, and tubal sterilization. In addition, attention should be paid to women with previous long-term use of IUDs.

Ectopic pregnancy following levonorgestrel emergency contraception: a case report

Use of levonorgestrel as emergency contraception is a safe and effective measure to prevent unwanted pregnancy. However, ectopic gestation in case of failure is a known risk. Access to levonorgestrel without a prescription in many countries has made it impossible to estimate the exact incidence of this potential adverse event. Thus, spontaneous reporting of cases serves to alert physicians to this possibility. We present a case of ectopic pregnancy following use of levonorgestrel emergency contraception. To our knowledge, this is the first case report from India following introduction of levonorgestrel emergency contraception in 2001.

Ectopic pregnancy following emergency contraception with ethinyloestradiol-levonorgestrel: a case report

BACKGROUND

Emergency contraception with ethinyloestradiol-levonorgestrel is effective, and ectopic pregnancy following its failure is rare.

CASE

A 21-year-old nulligravid Japanese woman with regular menstrual periods took ethinyloestradiol-levonorgestrel pills for emergency contraception (EC) 36 and 48 hours after a coitus complicated by retention of the condom in the vagina. She started bleeding vaginally 24 days after that intercourse. As the bleeding continued for three weeks she consulted a gynaecologist. The pregnancy test was positive. Two weeks later she complained of lower abdominal pain, and transvaginal ultrasonography suggested a pelvic blood collection. At emergency surgery, she was found to have a left tubal pregnancy.

CONCLUSION

Although ectopic pregnancy after failure of EC is rare, one should be alert to its possible occurrence.