4.5 Article

Expulsion and continuation rates of the levonorgestrel 52 mg intrauterine system was similar among nulligravid and parous users

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGY & OBSTETRICS
Volume 158, Issue 2, Pages 318-324

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ijgo.13998

Keywords

clinical performance; expulsion; intrauterine device; LNG-IUS; nulligravidas; parous users

Funding

  1. Fundacao de Apoio a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo (FAPESP) [2015/20504-9]
  2. Brazilian National Research Council (CNPq) [573747/2008-3]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Nulligravid and parous participants who used the 52 mg LNG-IUS exhibited similar rates of expulsion and continuation over a five-year period.
Objective To compare the expulsion and continuation rates of the levonorgestrel (LNG) 52 mg intrauterine system (IUS) in a cohort of nulligravid and parous users. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study that included 996 participants in whom we placed an LNG-IUS, and the participants were monitored for up to 5 years after device placement. We identify 498 nulligravid participants in the medical record database between 2012 and 2020. Each nulligravida was paired with a parous users who had an LNG-IUS inserted on the same day, just before or after the nulligravida. The Kaplan-Meier method and the log-rank test were used to compare the survival curves of the two groups. Results By the fifth year of use, the expulsion rates were 7.6/100 and 8.2/100 women-years (W-Ys) and the continuation rates were 641/100 W-Ys and 65.4/100 W-Ys without difference among nulligravid and parous users, respectively (P = 0.782 and P = 0.564, respectively). We observed 29 and 31 expulsions among nulligravid and parous users, respectively. Conclusion Nulligravid and parous participants who used the 52 mg LNG-IUS showed similar expulsion and continuation rates during five years of use.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available