Preventing IUCD-related pelvic infection: the efficacy of prophylactic doxycycline at insertion

U.S. Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use, 2024

The 2024 U.S. Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use (U.S. MEC) comprises recommendations for the use of specific contraceptive methods by persons who have certain characteristics or medical conditions. These recommendations for health care providers were updated by CDC after review of the scientific evidence and a meeting with national experts in Atlanta, Georgia, during January 25-27, 2023. The information in this report replaces the 2016 U.S. MEC (CDC. U.S. Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use, 2016. MMWR 2016:65[No. RR-3]:1-103). Notable updates include 1) the addition of recommendations for persons with chronic kidney disease; 2) revisions to the recommendations for persons with certain characteristics or medical conditions (i.e., breastfeeding, postpartum, postabortion, obesity, surgery, deep venous thrombosis or pulmonary embolism with or without anticoagulant therapy, thrombophilia, superficial venous thrombosis, valvular heart disease, peripartum cardiomyopathy, systemic lupus erythematosus, high risk for HIV infection, cirrhosis, liver tumor, sickle cell disease, solid organ transplantation, and drug interactions with antiretrovirals used for prevention or treatment of HIV infection); and 3) inclusion of new contraceptive methods, including new doses or formulations of combined oral contraceptives, contraceptive patches, vaginal rings, progestin-only pills, levonorgestrel intrauterine devices, and vaginal pH modulator. The recommendations in this report are intended to serve as a source of evidence-based clinical practice guidance for health care providers. The goals of these recommendations are to remove unnecessary medical barriers to accessing and using contraception and to support the provision of person-centered contraceptive counseling and services in a noncoercive manner. Health care providers should always consider the individual clinical circumstances of each person seeking contraceptive services. This report is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice for individual patients; when needed, patients should seek advice from their health care providers about contraceptive use.

[Prevention of postoperative or associated of care pelvic inflammatory diseases: CNGOF and SPILF Pelvic Inflammatory Diseases Guidelines]

Numerous prophylactic antibiotic regimens (PBR) have been evaluated particularly in surgical abortion, hysterosalpingography or caesarean section, but few randomized comparative trials are available. Recommendations for PBR should take into account, expected and demonstrated benefits that reduce the risk of surgical site infection, but also the impact on the microbiota, the risk of bacterial resistance selection, and the overall cost to the community. In addition, antibiotic prophylaxis is not the only one factor to reduce the risk of surgical site infection, such as preventive measures and good hygiene practices.

[Intrauterine contraception: CNGOF Contraception Guidelines]

OBJECTIVE

To provide national clinical guidelines focusing on intrauterine contraception.

METHODS

A systematic review of available literature was performed using Pubmed and Cochrane libraries. American, British and Canadian guidelines were considered as well.

RESULTS

Intrauterine contraception (IUC) displays a wide panel of indications, including adolescents, nulliparous, patients living with HIV before AIDS (Grade B) and women with history of ectopic pregnancy (Grade C). Cervical cancer screening should not be modified in women with IUC (Grade B). Bimanual examination and cervix inspection are mandatory before device insertion (Grade B). Patients should not systematically undergo screening for sexually transmitted infections (STI) before device insertion (Grade B). Screening for STI should be preferably done before insertion but it can be performed at the time of device insertion in asymptomatic women (Grade B). Routine antibiotic prophylaxis and premedication are not recommended before insertion (Grade A). A follow-up visit may be offered several weeks after insertion (Professional consensus). Routine pelvic ultrasound examination in not recommended after device insertion (Grade B). In patients with IUC, unscheduled bleeding, when persistent or associated with pelvic pain, requires further investigation to rule out complication (Professional agreement). Suspected uterine perforation warrants radiological workup to locate the device (Professional consensus). Laparoscopic approach should be preferred for elective removal of intrauterine device from abdominal cavity (Professional consensus). In case of accidental pregnancy with intrauterine device in situ, ectopic pregnancy should be excluded (Grade B). In case of viable and desired intrauterine pregnancy, intrauterine device removal is recommended if the strings are reachable (Grade C). Detection of Actinomyces-like organisms on pap smear in asymptomatic patients with intrauterine contraception does not require further intervention (Grade B). Immediate removal of intrauterine device is not recommended in case of STI or pelvic inflammatory disease (Grade B). Device removal should be considered in the absence of clinical improvement after 48 to 72 hours of appropriate treatment (Grade B).

CONCLUSION

Intrauterine contraception is a long-acting and reversible contraception method displaying great efficacy and high continuation rate. In contrast, complication rate is low. It should thus be offered to both nulliparous and multiparous women.

Practice Bulletin No. 186: Long-Acting Reversible Contraception: Implants and Intrauterine Devices

Intrauterine devices and contraceptive implants, also called long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARC), are the most effective reversible contraceptive methods. The major advantage of LARC compared with other reversible contraceptive methods is that they do not require ongoing effort on the part of the patient for long-term and effective use. In addition, after the device is removed, the return of fertility is rapid (1, 2). The purpose of this Practice Bulletin is to provide information for appropriate patient selection and evidence-based recommendations for LARC initiation and management. The management of clinical challenges associated with LARC use is beyond the scope of this document and is addressed in Committee Opinion No. 672, Clinical Challenges of Long-Acting Reversible Contraceptive Methods (3).

Testing for sexually transmitted infections at intrauterine device insertion: an evidence-based approach

This article reviews evidence to guide safe and cost-effective testing for asymptomatic Neisseria gonorrhea and Chlamydia trachomatis infection before inserting intrauterine devices (IUDs). All women should be screened with a history and pelvic examination before IUD insertion, but only high-risk women need a laboratory test; this includes women aged 25 years or younger with no test within the last year, and women with additional behavioral risk factors. If testing is indicated, it should be done on the same day as insertion not a separate visit. Women with positive test results should be treated as soon as results are available.

Clinical versus laboratory screening for sexually transmitted infections prior to insertion of intrauterine contraception among women living with HIV/AIDS: a randomized controlled trial

STUDY QUESTION

Does laboratory testing after syndromic screening for sexually transmitted infections (STIs) reduce the rate of intrauterine contraception (IUC) removal among women living with HIV/AIDS (WLHA)?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Additional laboratory testing after syndromic screening for STIs did not affect the likelihood that a woman would remove an IUC immediately or within 1 year of IUC use or the frequency of post-insertion unscheduled clinic visits. In low-risk WLHA, the incidence rate of IUC removal is low with or without laboratory testing.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Fear of infectious morbidity remains an obstacle to uptake of IUC by WLHA. The value of laboratory testing after syndromic screening for STI before the insertion of IUC remains uncertain.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

We enrolled WLHA from 2 September to 6 December 2013 and followed them up to 31 December 2014. After syndromic screening, 703 women free of STIs were randomized to either additional laboratory screening or no additional screening for STI before IUC insertion. The randomization sequence was generated by an independent statistician and randomization numbers placed in opaque sequentially numbered sealed envelopes. All women randomized had an IUC inserted and in all 672 participants completed the 1-year follow-up. The study staff who followed up the participants were blinded to the study allocation groups. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) were used to compare the incidence rates of IUC removal, unscheduled clinic attendance and IUC continuation between the two groups.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Women eligible to participate were 18-49 years old at study entry, in a relationship with a male partner, wanted to avoid pregnancy for at least 1 year and were undergoing HIV/AIDS care at Mulago Hospital, Uganda. Participants completed a baseline questionnaire and up to four follow-up questionnaires until discontinuation of IUC, loss to follow-up or end of study observation after 12 months.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

The rate of IUC removal was 8.8% (29/331) in the no additional screening group and 8.0% (27/341) in the additional laboratory screening group [IRR 1.1 (95% CI 0.63-1.93)]. Unscheduled clinic attendances were similar in the two groups at 1 year of IUC insertion: 13.6% (45/331) in the no additional screening group and 12.3% (42/241) in the additional laboratory screening group. During the 1-year follow-up, only five women, three from the no additional screening group and two from the additional laboratory screening group, developed pelvic inflammatory disease (PID), as defined by established diagnostic criteria.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

We were not able to carry out STI risk assessment directly from the men thus women with high-risk partners could have been included in the study and this may be responsible for the lack of a demonstrable effect of additional laboratory screening on incidence rates of IUC removals and unscheduled clinic attendance. The diagnosis of PID was based on clinical signs and symptoms; therefore, subclinical PID could have been missed.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

Among WLHA, the incidence rate of IUC removal is low and IUC continuation high. Syndromic screening for STIs could be sufficient in indentifying WLHA who are suitable for IUC use. However, our findings are only generalizable to women in HIV/AIDS care who have access to good follow-up.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS

The study was supported by Medical Education for Equitable Services to all Ugandans, a Medical Education Partnership Initiative grant number 5R24TW008886 from the office of Global AIDS Coordinator and the US Department of Health and Human Services, Health Resources and Services Administration and National Institutes of Health. Additional funding was from the Swedish International Development Agency, Swedish Research Council (SIDA/VR). The authors have no competing interests to declare.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

This trial was registered at Pan African Clinical Trial, Registry. PACTR 201308000561212.

Immediate postabortal insertion of intrauterine devices

Background The use of an effective contraceptive may be necessary after an abortion. Insertion of an intrauterine device (IUD) may be done the same day or later. Immediate IUD insertion is an option since the woman is not pregnant, pain of insertion is less because the cervical os is open, and her motivation to use contraception may be high. However, insertion of an IUD immediately after a pregnancy ends carries risks, such as spontaneous expulsion.Objectives To assess the safety and efficacy of IUD insertion immediately after spontaneous or induced abortion.Search methods We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, POPLINE, ClinicalTrials.gov,and ICTRP in January 27, 2014. We also contacted investigators to identify other trials.Selection criteria We sought all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with at least one treatment arm that involved IUD insertion immediately after an induced abortion or after curettage for spontaneous abortion.Data collection and analysis We evaluated the methodological quality of each report and abstracted the data. We focused on discontinuation rates for accidental pregnancy, perforation, expulsion, and pelvic inflammatory disease.We computed the weighted average of the rate ratios.We compute drisk ratios (RRs) with 95% Confidence Intervals (CIs).We performed an intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis by including all randomised participants in the analysis according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.Main results We identified 12 trials most of which are of moderate risk of bias involving 7,119 participants which described random assignment.Five trials randomised to either immediate or delayed insertion of IUD. One of them randomised to immediate versus delayed insertion of Copper 7 showed immediate insertion of the Copper 7 was associated with a higher risk of expulsion than was delayed insertion(RR 11.98, 95% CI 1.61 to 89.35,1 study, 259 participants); the quality of evidence was moderate. Moderate quality of evidence also suggests that use and expulsion of levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system or CuT380A was more likely for immediate compared to delayed insertion risk ratio (RR) 1.40 (95% CI 1.24 to 1.58; 3 studies; 878 participants) and RR 2.64 ( 95% CI 1.16 to 6.00; 3 studies; 878 participants) respectively. Another trial randomised to the levonorgestrel IUD or Nova T showed discontinuation rates due to pregnancy were likely to be higher for women in the Nova T group. (MD 8.70, 95% CI 3.92 to 13.48;1 study; 438 participants);moderate quality evidence.Seven trials examined immediate insertion of IUD only. From meta-analysis of two multicentre trials, pregnancy was less likely for the TCu 220C versus the Lippes Loop (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.75; 2 studies; 2257 participants ) as was expulsion (RR 0.61, 95% CI0.46 to 0.81; 2 studies; 2257 participants). Estimates for the TCu 220 versus the Copper 7 were RR 0.42 ( 95% CI 0.23 to 0.77; 2 studies, 2,274 participants) and RR 0.68, (95% CI 0.51 to 0.91); 2 studies, 2,274 participants), respectively. In other work, adding copper sleeves to the Lippes Loop improved efficacy (RR 3.40, 95% CI 1.28 to 9.04, 1 study, 400 participants) and reduced expulsion(RR 3.00, 95% CI 1.51 to 5.97; 1 study, 400 participants).Authors' conclusions Moderate quality evidence shows that insertion of an IUD immediately after abortion is safe and practical. IUD expulsion rates appear higher immediately after abortions compared to delayed insertions. However, at six months postabortion, IUD use is higher following immediate insertion compared to delayed insertion.

Prophylactic antibiotics in obstetrics–gynecology: a current asset, a future liability?

Currently, prophylactic antibiotics have proven effective in lowering the postoperative and postprocedure infection rate following vaginal hysterectomy, emergency cesarean section for the patient in labor, radical hysterectomy, abdominal hysterectomy, pregnancy termination, hysterosalpingogram and intrauterine device insertion. Guidelines for the most effective and safe use are presented. Concerns are raised regarding the widespread prolonged use of prophylactic antibiotics on women in labor to prevent Group B streptococcal infections in newborn children and women with prolonged preterm membrane rupture. There is also an awareness needed of a growing incidence of infections seen in the hospital from community-acquired methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and Clostridium difficile. These problems have not been addressed by the current prophylactic antibiotic strategies.

Emergency contraception

OBJECTIVE

To review current knowledge about emergency contraception (EC), including available options, their modes of action, efficacy, safety, and the effective provision of EC within a practice setting.

OPTIONS

The combined estradiol-levonorgestrel (Yuzpe regimen) and the levonorgestrel-only regimen, as well as post-coital use of copper intrauterine devices, are reviewed.

OUTCOMES

Efficacy in terms of reduction in risk of pregnancy, safety, and side effects of methods for EC and the effect of the means of access to EC on its appropriate use and the use of consistent contraception.

EVIDENCE

Studies published in English between January 1998 and March 2010 were retrieved though searches of Medline and the Cochrane Database, using appropriate key words (emergency contraception, post-coital contraception, emergency contraceptive pills, post-coital copper IUD). Clinical guidelines and position papers developed by health or family planning organizations were also reviewed.

VALUES

The studies reviewed were classified according to criteria described by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care, and the recommendations for practice were ranked according to this classification (Table 1).

BENEFITS, HARMS, AND COSTS

These guidelines are intended to help reduce unintended pregnancies by increasing awareness and appropriate use of EC.

SPONSOR

The Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada. Summary Statements 1. Hormonal emergency contraception may be effective if used up to 5 days after unprotected intercourse. (II-2) 2. The earlier hormonal emergency contraception is used, the more effective it is. (II-2) 3. A copper IUD can be effective emergency contraception if used within 7 days after intercourse. (II-2) 4. Levonorgestrel emergency contraception regimens are more effective and cause fewer side effects than the Yuzpe regimen. (I) 5. Levonorgestrel emergency contraception single dose (1.5 mg) and the 2-dose levonorgestrel regimen (0.75 mg 12 hours apart) have similar efficacy with no difference in side effects. (I) 6. Of the hormonal emergency contraception regimens available in Canada, levonorgestrel-only is the drug of choice. (I) 7. A pregnancy that results from failure of emergency contraception need not be terminated (I) Recommendations 1. Emergency contraception should be used as soon as possible after unprotected sexual intercourse. (II-2A) 2. Emergency contraception should be offered to women if unprotected intercourse has occurred within the time it is known to be effective (5 days for hormonal methods and up to 7 days for a copper IUD). (II-2B) 3. Women should be evaluated for pregnancy if menses have not begun within 21 days following emergency contraception treatment. (III-A) 4. During physician visits for periodic health examinations or reproductive health concerns, any woman in the reproductive age group who has not been sterilized may be counselled about emergency contraception in advance with detailed information about how and when to use it. (III-C).

A review of barriers and myths preventing the more widespread use of intrauterine contraception in nulliparous women

Objectives Intrauterine contracepives (IUCs) are highly effective and safe for use in all women, including those who are nulliparous. However, many myths and barriers prevent more widespread utilisation. The objective of this article was to explore the health care provider (HCP), health system and user issues that prevent more widespread use of IUCs, particularly among nulliparous women, and to present the evidence that supports achieving greater utilisation of these devices.

Methods MEDLINE, PubMed and Embase were used to identify studies reporting attitudes and beliefs around IUCs, and clinical studies providing evidence of their risks and benefits.

Results HCP, health system and user factors limiting use of IUCs were identified. The most widely explored barriers in published studies are those at the HCP level. User barriers are less well documented and health system barriers are mostly assessed through indirect evidence. Many, but not all, of the barriers can be reduced through greater understanding of the evidence.

Conclusions Efforts need to be made to disseminate the evidence, which shows that few contraindications exist to IUC use. Addressing HCP lack of knowledge, training and confidence with IUC insertions, particularly in nulliparous women, could make a substantial positive impact on IUC utilisation.

CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials

Overwhelming evidence shows the quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is not optimal. Without transparent reporting, readers cannot judge the reliability and validity of trial findings nor extract information for systematic reviews. Recent methodological analyses indicate that inadequate reporting and design are associated with biased estimates of treatment effects. Such systematic error is seriously damaging to RCTs, which are considered the gold standard for evaluating interventions because of their ability to minimise or avoid bias. A group of scientists and editors developed the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement to improve the quality of reporting of RCTs. It was first published in 1996 and updated in 2001. The statement consists of a checklist and flow diagram that authors can use for reporting an RCT. Many leading medical journals and major international editorial groups have endorsed the CONSORT statement. The statement facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of RCTs. During the 2001 CONSORT revision, it became clear that explanation and elaboration of the principles underlying the CONSORT statement would help investigators and others to write or appraise trial reports. A CONSORT explanation and elaboration article was published in 2001 alongside the 2001 version of the CONSORT statement. After an expert meeting in January 2007, the CONSORT statement has been further revised and is published as the CONSORT 2010 Statement. This update improves the wording and clarity of the previous checklist and incorporates recommendations related to topics that have only recently received recognition, such as selective outcome reporting bias. This explanatory and elaboration document-intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the CONSORT statement-has also been extensively revised. It presents the meaning and rationale for each new and updated checklist item providing examples of good reporting and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies. Several examples of flow diagrams are included. The CONSORT 2010 Statement, this revised explanatory and elaboration document, and the associated website (www.consort-statement.org) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of randomised trials.

An intrauterine device as a possible cause of change in the microbial flora of the female genital system

AIM

An intrauterine device (IUD), used by millions of women worldwide, is one of the most efficient methods of contraception. The goal of our study was to compare a group of women using the IUD to a control group.

MATERIAL & METHODS

The survey included 236 women of fertile age from gynaecological practices in the area of Split and Dalmatia County, Croatia. The subjects were divided into two groups: IUD users and a control group (women not using any contraception methods). Sampling, transportation, sample processing in the laboratory and interpretation of results were conducted using standard microbiological procedures and methods.

RESULTS

Opportunistic bacteria were statistically more frequently isolated among IUD users (P < 0.001). The most frequently isolated bacteria in both groups were Escherichia coli and Ureaplasma urealyticum with significantly higher rates in IUD users (P < 0.001). Both colonization and infection had higher rates in IUD users (P < 0.001). There were no significant differences either in the frequency of bacteria isolation regarding different IUD types (P = 0.93), or in relation to duration of IUD use (P = 0.67).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the data in our study IUD users have an increased chance of developing a cervical infection caused by the bacteria Escherichia coli and Ureaplasma urealyticum. Therefore, before IUD insertion women should be screened and treated for asymptomatic vaginal or cervical infections to prevent possible serious IUD-associated infections.

Long-term safety, efficacy, and patient acceptability of the intrauterine Copper T-380A contraceptive device

The intrauterine device (IUD), primarily in the form of the copper IUD, is used by more than 150 million women around the world, making it the most widely used reversible method of contraception. With a remarkably low failure rate of less than 1 per 100 women in the first year of use, the Copper T-380A is in the top tier of contraceptives in terms of efficacy. Risks of utilization include perforation and an increased risk of infection in the first 20 days following insertion. Overall, the number of adverse events is low, making the Copper T-380A a very safe contraceptive method. The most common reasons for the discontinuation of this method are menstrual bleeding and dysmenorrhea. However, cumulative discontinuation rates of Copper T-380A are lower than that have been reported for other methods, indicating that the Copper T-380A is highly acceptable to women. After 5 years, approximately 50% of all women, who have a Copper T-380A inserted, will continue to use this highly effective contraceptive method.

Immediate postabortal insertion of intrauterine devices

BACKGROUND

Insertion of an intrauterine device (IUD) immediately after an abortion has several advantages. The woman is known not to be pregnant. Many clinicians refuse to insert an IUD in a woman who is not menstruating. After induced abortion, a woman's motivation to use contraception may be high. However, insertion of an IUD immediately after a pregnancy ends carries risks, such as spontaneous expulsion due to recent cervical dilation.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the safety and efficacy of IUD insertion immediately after spontaneous or induced abortion.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched MEDLINE, CENTRAL, POPLINE, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, and ICTRP. We also contacted investigators to identify other trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We sought all randomized controlled trials with at least one treatment arm that involved IUD insertion immediately after an induced abortion or after curettage for spontaneous abortion. We identified 11 trials which described random assignment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We evaluated the methodological quality of each report and abstracted the data. We focused on discontinuation rates for accidental pregnancy, perforation, expulsion, and pelvic inflammatory disease. We computed the weighted average of the rate ratios. We computed relative risks (RR) with 95% Confidence Intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

Three trials randomized to immediate or delayed insertion. One showed no significant differences. Meta-analysis of two showed use of levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system or CuT380A was more likely for immediate versus delayed insertion (RR 1.18; 95% CI 1.08 to 1.28). Another trial randomized to the levonorgestrel IUD or Nova T; discontinuation rates due to pregnancy were 0.8 and 9.5, respectively. Sub-analysis showed higher expulsion rates for postabortal than interval insertions (levonorgestrel: 2.8 versus 6.8; Nova T: 3.0 versus 8.3).Seven trials examined immediate insertion. From meta-analysis of two multicenter trials, pregnancy was less likely for the TCu 220C versus the Lippes Loop (RR 0.38; 95% CI 0.20 to 0.72) as was expulsion (RR 0.51; 95% CI 0.30 to 0.88). Estimates for the TCu 220 versus the Copper 7 were 0.52 (95% CI 0.36 to 0.77) and 0.58 (95% CI 0.39 to 0.87), respectively. In other work, adding copper sleeves to the Lippes Loop improved efficacy (RR 3.82; 95% CI 1.41 to 10.36) and reduced expulsion (RR 3.37; 95% CI 1.65 to 6.90).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Insertion of an IUD immediately after abortion is safe and practical. IUD expulsion rates appear higher than after interval insertions. However, IUD use is higher at six months with immediate than with interval insertion.

Copper containing intra-uterine devices versus depot progestogens for contraception

BACKGROUND

Highly effective contraception is essential to reduce unintended pregnancies and the effect these have on individuals, society and public health resources. Intrauterine devices (IUDs) and depot progestogens are two commonly used long-acting, reversible contraceptive methods with different risk and benefit profiles.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the contraceptive and non-contraceptive benefits and risks of using the copper-containing IUD versus depot progestogens for contraception.

SEARCH STRATEGY

In June 2009 we searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Pubmed, Popline, Clinical Trials.gov, the Current Controlled Trials metaRegister, EMBASE and LILACS, and contacted study authors.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized trials comparing women using copper-containing IUDs with women using depot progestogens.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We assessed eligibility and trial quality, extracted and double-entered data.

MAIN RESULTS

Two studies were included in the review. In the one study in HIV infected women, the IUD was compared with depot progestogen or the oral contraceptive, according to the women's choice. As the majority of women chose depot progestogen, we have included this study in the review, within a mixed hormonal contraception sub-group.Overall, the copper IUD was more effective than depot progestogens/hormonal contraception at preventing pregnancy (risk ratio (RR) 0.45; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.24 to 0.84). HIV disease progression was reduced in the IUD group (RR 0.58; 95% CI 0.39 to 0.87). There was no significant difference in pelvic inflammatory disease rates between the two groups. Discontinuation of the allocated method was less frequent with the IUD in one study, and less frequent with hormonal contraception in the other study (in which women were allowed to switch between various hormonal methods).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In the populations studied, the IUD was more effective than hormonal contraception with respect to pregnancy prevention. High quality research is urgently needed to compare the effects, if any, of these two commonly used contraception methods on HIV acquisition/seroconversion and HIV/AIDS disease progression.

Cochrane systematic reviews of IUD trials: lessons learned

BACKGROUND

Intrauterine devices (IUDs) are the most widely used reversible contraceptives in the world today, and decisions about their use should reflect the best available evidence.

STUDY DESIGN

We performed a computer search of the Cochrane Library for all IUD-related reviews.

RESULTS

Eleven reviews related to IUDs have been registered in The Cochrane Library; 10 have been completed, and one is in progress. Topics include type of IUD, timing of insertion, clinical management, emergency contraception and use as gynecological treatment. The copper T380A is the most effective copper IUD; the levonorgestrel intrauterine system has efficacy comparable to that of IUDs with >250 mm(2) of copper. The frameless device may be comparable in efficacy to the copper T380A, although whether problems with the initial inserter are resolved is unclear. Immediate postpartum and postabortal insertion appears safe and effective, although trials comparing immediate to delayed insertions are scarce. Prophylactic antibiotics at the time of insertion appear unwarranted except in populations with a high prevalence of sexually transmitted diseases. Many nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs reduce pain and bleeding associated with IUDs, although prophylactic use of ibuprofen does not improve continuation rates. The levonorgestrel system is superior to oral progestins in treating heavy uterine bleeding. This IUD compares favorably with endometrial ablation techniques and presents an alternative to hysterectomy for many women.

DISCUSSION

Trials are needed to evaluate immediate vs. delayed insertion after delivery or abortion and to explore emerging therapeutic uses of the levonorgestrel system, such as treatment of endometrial hyperplasia.

Does insertion and use of an intrauterine device increase the risk of pelvic inflammatory disease among women with sexually transmitted infection? A systematic review

Concerns exist as to whether the insertion of copper and levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine devices (IUDs) increases the risk of pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) among women with sexually transmitted infection (STI). We searched the MEDLINE database for all articles published between January 1966 and March 2005 that included evidence relevant to IUDs and STIs and PID. None of the studies that examined women with STIs compared the risk of PID between those with insertion or use of an IUD and those who had not received an IUD. We reviewed indirect evidence from six prospective studies that examined women with insertion of a copper IUD and compared risk of PID between those with STIs at the time of insertion with those with no STIs. These studies suggested that women with chlamydial infection or gonorrhea at the time of IUD insertion were at an increased risk of PID relative to women without infection. The absolute risk of PID was low for both groups (0-5% for those with STIs and 0-2% for those without).

Sample size calculations in randomised trials: mandatory and mystical

Investigators should properly calculate sample sizes before the start of their randomised trials and adequately describe the details in their published report. In these a-priori calculations, determining the effect size to detect--eg, event rates in treatment and control groups--reflects inherently subjective clinical judgments. Furthermore, these judgments greatly affect sample size calculations. We question the branding of trials as unethical on the basis of an imprecise sample size calculation process. So-called underpowered trials might be acceptable if investigators use methodological rigor to eliminate bias, properly report to avoid misinterpretation, and always publish results to avert publication bias. Some shift of emphasis from a fixation on sample size to a focus on methodological quality would yield more trials with less bias. Unbiased trials with imprecise results trump no results at all. Clinicians and patients deserve guidance now.

Immediate postabortal insertion of intrauterine devices

BACKGROUND

Insertion of an intrauterine device (IUD) immediately after an abortion has several potential advantages. The woman is known not to be pregnant, a major concern for clinicians. For example, many clinicians refuse to insert an IUD in a woman who is not menstruating. After induced abortion, a woman's motivation to use contraception may be high. However, insertion of an IUD immediately after a pregnancy ends carries potential risks as well. For example, the risk of spontaneous expulsion may be increased due to recent cervical dilation.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the safety and efficacy of IUD insertion immediately after spontaneous or induced abortion.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We used MEDLINE, Popline, and EMBASE computer searches, supplemented by review articles and contacts with investigators.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We sought all randomized controlled trials that had at least one treatment arm that involved IUD insertion immediately after an induced abortion or after curettage for spontaneous abortion. We identified 12 trials which described random assignment but excluded three from this review. Two of these revealed unethical research conduct, and one used alternate assignment to treatments.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We evaluated the methodological quality of each report and abstracted information onto a data collection form. We focused on gross discontinuation rates (single-decrement life table analysis) for accidental pregnancy, perforation, expulsion, and pelvic inflammatory disease. We entered the data into RevMan 3.1 for analysis of Peto odds ratios.

MAIN RESULTS

In large multicenter trials, the TCu 220C device proved superior to either the Lippes Loop D or the Copper 7 IUDs for immediate postabortal insertion. In single-center trials, the Nova T IUD had a significantly higher discontinuation rate for pregnancy than did the Multiload 250 (OR 4.5; 95% CI 1.0-19.8), while the Nova T had a significantly lower discontinuation rate for pregnancy than did the TCu 200 (OR 0.3; 95% CI 0.1-0.9). The levonorgestrel-releasing device was more effective in preventing pregnancy than was the Nova T. Only one trial compared immediate vs. delayed insertion. In this trial, the performance of the Copper 7 IUD inserted immediately after abortion was inferior to that after interval insertion (remote from pregnancy), although the differences were not statistically significant.

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

Insertion of an IUD immediately after abortion is both safe and practical. IUD expulsion rates appear higher than after interval insertions.

Intrauterine Contraceptive Devices and Risk of Pelvic Inflammatory Disease

The intrauterine contraceptive device (IUD) is highly effective and cost-effective. IUD use is limited in some regions, however, due to concerns about increased risk of pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) and subsequent complications such as infertility and ectopic pregnancy. Recent reviews suggest that the overall risk of PID with modern IUDs is lower than previously thought, at least in regions with a low prevalence of sexually transmitted infections (STIs). Risk of PID may be higher, however, in places where gonorrhoea and chlamydia are prevalent, where screening for STIs is limited and where aseptic conditions for insertion are difficult to ensure. A World Health Organization multi-centre study and other studies have confirmed regional differences in STI prevalence, and the WHO study established that PID risk is temporally related to IUD insertion procedures. Studies of the effectiveness of antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent infectious complications are inconclusive due at least in part to use of sub-therapeutic regimens for pathogens commonly implicated in PID. In summary, the IUD can be safe and effective if inserted under aseptic conditions in women free of cervical infection. Further study is needed to define appropriate standards of care for IUD insertion where STI prevalence is high and ability to rule out infection is limited. Even with safe insertion, IUD promotion in areas of high STI/HIV prevalence must address women's needs for dual protection from infection and unwanted pregnancy.

FFPRHC Guidance (January 2004) The Copper Intrauterine Device as Long-term Contraception

This Guidance provides information for clinicians providing women with copper-bearing intrauterine devices as long-term contraception. A key to the grades of recommendations, based on levels of evidence, is given at the end of this document. Details of the methods used by the Clinical Effectiveness Unit (CEU) in developing this Guidance and evidence tables summarising the research basis of the recommendations are available on the Faculty website (www.ffprhc.org.uk). Abbreviations (in alphabetical order) used include: acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS); actinomyces-like organisms (ALOs); automated external defibrillator (AED); blood pressure (BP); British National Formulary (BNF); confidence interval (CI); copper-bearing intrauterine contraceptive device (IUD); emergency contraception (EC); Faculty Aid to Continuing Professional Development Topic (FACT); levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (IUS); human immunodeficiency virus (HIV); Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA); non-steroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs); odds ratio (OR); pelvic inflammatory disease (PID); relative risk (RR); Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG); Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN); sexually transmitted infection (STI); termination of pregnancy (TOP); World Health Organization (WHO); WHO Medical Eligibility Criteria (WHOMEC); WHO Selected Practice Recommendations (WHOSPR).

Sexually transmitted infections and contraceptives: selective issues

It is important to examine the successful completed research and use it to move forward in practice to halt the almost 50% unintended pregnancy rate in the United States and the continued worldwide epidemic of HIV and other STIs. A significant development has been the evidence supporting the IUD as a valuable contraceptive option available to many women, including women who are HIV infected, with no increased risks of infertility or PID. Evidence exists that OCPs may increase chlamydial infection acquisition and cervicitis, but it is unlikely that OCP use is associated with PID. The lack of female-controlled dual method protection remains a void, but with the introduction of products such as FemCap and Reality condom and the continuing progress of microbicides and spermicides, the future is brighter. Clearly research into the interactions of STIs and contraceptives must continue to discern how best to approach a resolution to these public health concerns that affect women and the global population.

Blinding in randomised trials: hiding who got what

Blinding embodies a rich history spanning over two centuries. Most researchers worldwide understand blinding terminology, but confusion lurks beyond a general comprehension. Terms such as single blind, double blind, and triple blind mean different things to different people. Moreover, many medical researchers confuse blinding with allocation concealment. Such confusion indicates misunderstandings of both. The term blinding refers to keeping trial participants, investigators (usually health-care providers), or assessors (those collecting outcome data) unaware of the assigned intervention, so that they will not be influenced by that knowledge. Blinding usually reduces differential assessment of outcomes (information bias), but can also improve compliance and retention of trial participants while reducing biased supplemental care or treatment (sometimes called co-intervention). Many investigators and readers naïvely consider a randomised trial as high quality simply because it is double blind, as if double-blinding is the sine qua non of a randomised controlled trial. Although double blinding (blinding investigators, participants, and outcome assessors) indicates a strong design, trials that are not double blinded should not automatically be deemed inferior. Rather than solely relying on terminology like double blinding, researchers should explicitly state who was blinded, and how. We recommend placing greater credence in results when investigators at least blind outcome assessments, except with objective outcomes, such as death, which leave little room for bias. If investigators properly report their blinding efforts, readers can judge them. Unfortunately, many articles do not contain proper reporting. If an article claims blinding without any accompanying clarification, readers should remain sceptical about its effect on bias reduction.

Immediate postabortal insertion of intrauterine devices

BACKGROUND

Insertion of an intrauterine device (IUD) immediately after an abortion has several potential advantages. The woman is known not to be pregnant, a major concern for clinicians. For example, many clinicians refuse to insert an IUD in a woman who is not menstruating [Stanback 1997]. After induced abortion, a woman's motivation to use contraception may be high. Among women who have limited access to a clinician, abortion care may provide a unique opportunity to address a woman's need for contraception [Mahomed 1997; McLaurin 1993; Wolf 1994]. A copper IUD confers nearly the same contraceptive efficacy as does tubal sterilization [Peterson 1996], yet it is simpler, less expensive, and promptly reversible. In addition, insertion of an IUD immediately after abortion may avoid discomfort related to insertion, and any bleeding from the insertion will be disguised by the expected bleeding after abortion. However, insertion of an IUD immediately after a pregnancy ends carries potential risks as well. For example, the risk of perforation may be increased due to softening of the myometrium. One IUD manufacturer in the United States warns that "The PROGESTASERT(R) system is not intended for immediate postabortion or postpartum insertion It should not be inserted until involution of the uterus is complete. The incidence of perforation and expulsion is greater if involution is not completed." [ALZA 1998] The package labeling for the Copper 7 stated that it should not be inserted after an abortion until involution was complete "in order to avoid a higher incidence of perforation or expulsion."[Gillett 1980] Another potential concern is infection. Insertion of an IUD after a clandestine or unsafe abortion may increase the risk of upper genital tract infection compared with interval insertion (remote from pregnancy).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the safety and efficacy of IUD insertion immediately after spontaneous or induced abortion.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We used Medline, Popline, and EMBASE computer searches, supplemented by review articles and contacts with investigators.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We sought all randomized controlled trials that had at least one treatment arm that involved IUD insertion immediately after an induced abortion or after curettage for spontaneous abortion. We identified 12 trials which described random assignment but excluded three from this review. Two of these revealed unethical research conduct, and one used alternate assignment to treatments.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We evaluated the methodological quality of each report and abstracted information onto a data collection form. We focused on gross discontinuation rates (single-decrement life table analysis) for accidental pregnancy, perforation, expulsion, and pelvic inflammatory disease. We entered the data into RevMan 3.1 for analysis of Peto odds ratios.

MAIN RESULTS

In large multicenter trials, the TCu 220C device proved superior to either the Lippes Loop D or the Copper 7 IUDs for immediate post-abortal insertion. The Peto OR for discontinuation for pregnancy was 0.4 (95% CI 0.2-0.7) compared with the Lippes Loop D and 0.5 (95% CI 0.3-0.8) compared with the Copper 7. Expulsions were also significantly less common with the TCu 220C than with the other two IUDs. In single-center trials, the Nova T IUD had a signicantly higher discontinuation rate for pregnancy than did the Multiload 250 (OR 4.5; 95% CI 1.0-19.8), while the Nova T had a significantly lower discontinuation rate for pregnancy than did the TCu 200 (OR 0.3; 95% CI 0.1-0.9). Only one trial compared immediate vs. delayed insertion. In this trial, the performance of the Copper 7 IUD inserted immediately after abortion was inferior to that after interval insertion (remote from pregnancy), although the differences were not statistically significant. Addition of copper sleeves to a Lippes Loop D improved its performance, but addition of a topical hydrogel to a Spring Coil did not offer benefit. Overall, rates of perforation and pelvic inflammatory disease were low.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Insertion of an IUD immediately after abortion is both safe and practical. This was true for both induced and reported "spontaneous" abortions, many of which may have been induced under clandestine circumstances. IUD expulsion rates were higher after second-trimester abortions than after earlier abortions, so delaying insertion may be advisable after later abortions. Although Copper 7 devices inserted unrelated to pregnancy may perform better than those inserted after abortion, many women who express interest in intrauterine contraception do not return for the scheduled insertion. These women may remain unprotected against unintended pregnancy. However, evidence is inadequate to compare the safety and efficacy of IUD insertion immediately after abortion vs. insertion some weeks later.

High rate of bacterial vaginosis among women with intrauterine devices in Manado, Indonesia

Recent research reported that bacterial vaginosis (BV) might enhance the acquisition and transmission of HIV. BV is also associated with an increased risk of pelvic inflammatory disease, a disease also associated with intrauterine device (IUD) insertion. To measure the magnitude of this problem, we conducted a prevalence survey of BV and sexually transmitted diseases (STDs; defined as current infections with Neisseria gonorrhoeae, Chlamydia trachomatis, and/or Trichomonas vaginalis) among all patients attending a family planning clinic in Manado from May to July 1999. BV was diagnosed by Gram stain using Nugent's criteria and vaginal trichomoniasis by wet mount or culture. Cervical infections with C. trachomatis and N. gonorrhoeae were diagnosed by DNA probe. Of 357 patients, 116 (32.5%) had BV, 83 (23.3%) had trichomoniasis, 9 (2.5%) had chlamydia, and 8 (2.2%) had gonorrhea. The prevalence of STD was similar among users of all types of contraception. However, BV was more common among IUD users (47.2%) than among non-IUD users (29.9%). This association persisted after controlling for age, education, ever had douching, and any STD (odds ratio 2.0, 95% CI 1.1-3.8). BV was also associated with STD (41.3% in women with STD vs. 29.4% in women without). This association remained significant after adjusting for age, education, ever had douching, and IUD use (odds ratio 1.7, 95% CI 1.1-2.9). Because we found that BV was associated with IUDs and that other studies reported that both BV and IUDs were associated with pelvic inflammatory disease, a Gram stain evaluation of BV may be considered prior to IUD insertion

Is the intrauterine device appropriate contraception for HIV-1-infected women?

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether the risk of complications is higher in HIV-1-infected women compared with non-infected women in the two years following insertion of the intrauterine contraceptive device.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

POPULATION

Six hundred and forty-nine women (156 HIV-1-infected, 493 non-infected) in Nairobi, Kenya who requested an intrauterine contraceptive device and met local eligibility criteria.

METHODS

We gathered information on complications related to the use of the intrauterine contraceptive device, including pelvic inflammatory disease, removals due to infection, pain or bleeding, expulsions, and pregnancies at one, four, and 24 months after insertion by study physicians masked to participants' HIV-1 status. Cox regression was used to estimate hazard ratios.

RESULTS

Complications were identified in 94 of 636 women returning for follow up (14.7% of HIV-1-infected, 14.8% of non-infected). The incidence of pelvic inflammatory disease was rare in both infected (2.0%) and non-infected (0.4%) groups. Multivariate analyses suggested no association between HIV-1 infection and increased risk of overall complications (hazard ratio = 1.0; 95% CI 0.6-1.6). Infection-related complications (e.g. any pelvic tenderness, removal for infection or pain) were also similar between groups (10.7% of HIV-1-infected, 8.8% of non-infected; P = 0.50), although there was a non-significant increase in infection-related complications among HIV-1-infected women with use of the intrauterine contraceptive device longer than five months (hazard ratio = 1.8; 95% CI 0.8-4.4). Neither overall nor infection-related complications differed by CD4 (immune) status.

CONCLUSIONS

HIV-1-infected women often have a critical need for safe and effective contraception. The intrauterine contraceptive device may be an appropriate contraceptive method for HIV-1-infected women with ongoing access to medical services.

Evaluation of postabortion IUD insertion in Egyptian women

This study was carried out at Alhussein University Hospital and Elmonera General Hospital to assess the safety and efficacy of intrauterine device (IUD) insertion immediately after spontaneous abortion compared with insertion 2 weeks after abortion. One hundred women between ages 18 and 40 years were recruited from those admitted via the emergency room with first trimester spontaneous abortion. All women were counseled about a method of contraception, particularly copper T-380, and divided into two groups: Group I, which included 69 women who preferred immediate IUD insertion, and Group II, which included 31 women who asked for late IUD insertion 2 weeks after an abortion. All women were followed at 2, 6, and 10 weeks after insertion of IUDs. Bleeding patterns were comparable in both groups. Mild bleeding occurred in 9.2% and 16% in Groups I and II, respectively; moderate bleeding occurred in 80% and 64%, respectively, and severe bleeding was observed in 10.8% and 20%, respectively. This was not significant. Expulsion rate was 4.5% and 3.4% in Groups I and II, respectively, which was also not significant. There were no cases of perforation or pelvic infections. This study showed that insertion of an IUD immediately after a spontaneous abortion is safe and could be offered to those who have had an abortion and who ask for a method of contraception.

Intrauterine device and upper-genital-tract infection

Concern about upper-genital-tract infection related to intrauterine devices (IUDs) limits their wider use. In this systematic review I summarise the evidence concerning IUD-associated infection and infertility. Choice of an inappropriate comparison group, overdiagnosis of salpingitis in IUD users, and inability to control for the confounding effects of sexual behaviour have exaggerated the apparent risk. Women with symptomless gonorrhoea or chlamydial infection having an IUD inserted have a higher risk of salpingitis than do uninfected women having an IUD inserted; however, the risk appears similar to that of infected women not having an IUD inserted. A cohort study of HIV-positive women using a copper IUD suggests that there is no significant increase in the risk of complications or viral shedding. Similarly, fair evidence indicates no important effect of IUD use on tubal infertility. Contemporary IUDs rival tubal sterilisation in efficacy and are much safer than previously thought.

Antibiotic prophylaxis for intrauterine contraceptive device insertion

BACKGROUND

Concern about the risk of upper genital tract infection (pelvic inflammatory disease) often limits use of the IUD, a highly effective contraceptive. Prophylactic antibiotic administration around the time of induced abortion significantly reduces the risk of postoperative endometritis.(Sawaya, 1996) Since the risk of IUD-related infection is limited to the first few weeks to months after insertion,(Lee, 1983; Farley, 1992) contamination of the endometrial cavity at the time of insertion(Mishell, 1966) appears to be the mechanism, rather than the IUD or string itself. Thus, antibiotic administration before IUD insertion might reduce the risk of upper genital tract infection from passive introduction of bacteria at insertion.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of prophylactic antibiotic administration before IUD insertion in reducing IUD-related complications and discontinuations within three months of insertion. The primary outcome was pelvic inflammatory disease (four reports) or early removals of the device (two reports).

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched both MEDLINE and EMBASE, handsearches of journals through CENTRAL, and lists of references. We also wrote to international experts in the field to identify unpublished studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials using any antibiotic compared with a placebo. We found four such trials; two had pilot study data available.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

DATA EXTRACTION

We used searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and handsearches of journals available through CENTRAL. We also reviewed lists of references in original research and in review articles. We wrote to experts to identify unpublished trials and made telephone calls to authors to supply missing information. Two independent reviewers abstracted data. We assessed the validity of each study using methods suggested in the Cochrane Handbook.

DATA SYNTHESIS

We generated 2x2 tables for the principal outcome measures. We used the Peto modified Mantel-Haenszel technique to calculate odds ratios and assessed statistical heterogeneity between studies.

MAIN RESULTS

The odds ratios for pelvic inflammatory disease associated with use of prophylactic doxycycline or azithromycin compared with placebo or no treatment was 0.89 (95%CI 0.53-1.51). Use of prophylaxis was associated with a small reduction in unscheduled vists to the provider (OR 0.82; 95% CI 0.70-0.98). Use of doxycycline or azithromycin had little effect on the likelihood of removal of the IUD within 90 days of insertion (OR 1.05; 95% CI 0.68-1.63). Significant heterogeneity did not exist between studies.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Use of either doxycycline 200 mg or azithromycin 500 mg by mouth before IUD insertion confers little benefit. While the reduction in unscheduled visits to the provider was marginally significant, the cost-effectiveness of routine prophylaxis remains questionable. A uniform finding in these trials was the low risk of IUD-associated infection, with or without use of antibiotic prophylaxis.

Prophylactic antibiotics for intrauterine device insertion: a metaanalysis of the randomized controlled trials

We evaluated the effectiveness of prophylactic antibiotic administration before IUD insertion in reducing the incidence of pelvic inflammatory disease, unscheduled visits back to the clinician, and IUD discontinuations within 3 months of insertion. We performed a metaanalysis of all known randomized controlled trials comparing an antibiotic (either oral doxycycline or azithromycin) versus a placebo or no treatment. Use of prophylaxis significantly reduced the frequency of unscheduled return visits (odds ratio 0.82; 95% CI 0.70, 0.98). The protection against pelvic inflammatory disease was smaller and not statistically significant 0.89 (95% CI 0.53, 1.51). No significant effect on premature IUD discontinuation was evident. Use of either doxycycline or azithromycin before IUD insertion offered little observable benefit in the US. Prophylaxis reduced unscheduled visits and possibly PID in developing countries, which have higher rates of sexually transmitted diseases than in the US. A more important finding in these trials is the low incidence of pelvic inflammatory disease with or without prophylactic antibiotics.

Use of sexually transmitted disease risk assessment algorithms for selection of intrauterine device candidates

Sexually transmitted diseases (STD) are an important contraindication for intrauterine device (IUD) insertion. Nevertheless, laboratory testing for STD is not possible in many settings. The objective of this study is to evaluate the use of risk assessment algorithms to predict STD and subsequent IUD-related complications among IUD candidates. Among 615 IUD users in Kenya, the following algorithms were evaluated: 1) an STD algorithm based on US Agency for International Development (USAID) Technical Working Group guidelines: 2) a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) algorithm for management of chlamydia; and 3) a data-derived algorithm modeled from study data. Algorithms were evaluated for prediction of chlamydial and gonococcal infection at 1 month and complications (pelvic inflammatory disease [PID], IUD removals, and IUD expulsions) over 4 months. Women with STD were more likely to develop complications than women without STD (19% vs 6%; risk ratio = 2.9; 95% CI 1.3-6.5). For STD prediction, the USAID algorithm was 75% sensitive and 48% specific, with a positive likelihood ratio (LR+) of 1.4. The CDC algorithm was 44% sensitive and 72% specific, LR+ = 1.6. The data-derived algorithm was 91% sensitive and 56% specific, with LR+ = 2.0 and LR- = 0.2. Category-specific LR for this algorithm identified women with very low (< 1%) and very high (29%) infection probabilities. The data-derived algorithm was also the best predictor of IUD-related complications. These results suggest that use of STD algorithms may improve selection of IUD users. Women at high risk for STD could be counseled to avoid IUD, whereas women at moderate risk should be monitored closely and counseled to use condoms.

Complications of use of intrauterine devices among HIV-1-infected women

BACKGROUND

A WHO expert group and the International Planned Parenthood Federation recommend against use of intrauterine devices (IUDs) in HIV-1-infected women based on theoretical concerns about pelvic infection and increased blood loss. We investigated whether the risk of complications after IUD insertion is higher in HIV-1-infected women than in non-infected women.

METHODS

649 (156 HIV-1 infected 493 non-infected) women in Nairobi, Kenya, who requested and met local eligibility criteria for insertion of an IUD were enrolled. We gathered information on IUD-related complications, including pelvic inflammatory disease, removals due to infection, pain, or bleeding, expulsions, and pregnancies at 1 and 4 months after insertion. Patients' HIV-1 status was masked from physicians.

FINDINGS

Complications were identified in 48 of 615 women (11 [7.6%] HIV-1-infected women, 37 [7.9%] non-infected). Incident pelvic inflammatory disease (two [1.4%] HIV-1 infected, one [0.2%] non-infected) and infection-related complications (any tenderness, removal of IUD for infection or pain; ten [6.9%] HIV-1 infected, 27 [5.7%] non-infected) were also rare and similar in the two groups. Complication rates were similar by CD4 (immune) status. Multivariate analyses suggested no association between HIV-1 infection and increased risks for overall complications (odds ratio 0.8 [95% CI 0.4-1.7]) or infection-related complications (1.0 [0.5-2.3]), adjusted for marital status, study site, previous IUD use, ethnic origin, and frequency of sexual intercourse, but a slight increase cannot be ruled out.

INTERPRETATION

Our data suggest that IUDs may be a safe contraceptive method for appropriately selected HIV-1-infected women with continuing access to medical services.

Randomised controlled trial of prophylactic antibiotics before insertion of intrauterine devices. IUD Study Group

BACKGROUND

The value of antibiotic prophylaxis before insertion of an intrauterine device (IUD) remains uncertain. We undertook a triple-masked, randomised, placebo-controlled trial to find out whether such prophylaxis reduces the rate of IUD removal within 90 days.

METHODS

11 clinic sites in southern California enrolled women who requested IUD insertion and were at low risk of sexually transmitted infection according to self-reported medical history. We randomly assigned 1985 participants either 500 mg azithromycin or placebo capsules of identical appearance taken about 1 h before insertion of a Copper T 380A IUD. 118 women did not have an IUD inserted. We followed up 1833 of the remaining 1867 (98%) participants for at least 90 days after insertion.

FINDINGS

The rate of IUD removal for any reason other than partial expulsion was 3.8% (35/918) in the antibiotic group and 3.4% (31/915) in the placebo group (relative risk 1.1 [95% CI 0.7-1.8]). The two treatment groups sought medical attention with equal frequency (mean 38 visits per 100 women). During the 90 days after IUD insertion, only one woman from each assignment group had salpingitis, as defined by established criteria.

INTERPRETATION

Prophylaxis with azithromycin did not affect the likelihood that a woman would retain her IUD at 90 days or the frequency of postinsertion medical attention. In appropriately screened women, the risk of upper-genital-tract infection is negligible after IUD insertion, with or without the administration of prophylactic antibiotics.