@2024 Afarand., IRAN
ISSN: 2251-8215 Sarem Journal of Reproductive Medicine 2017;1(1):15-19
ISSN: 2251-8215 Sarem Journal of Reproductive Medicine 2017;1(1):15-19
Rotating Withdrawal as an Effective Technique to Decrease Complications of IUD
ARTICLE INFO
Article Type
Original ResearchAuthors
Saremi A.T. (*)(*) “Sarem Fertility & Infertility Research Center (SAFIR)” and “Sarem Cell Research Center (SCRC)” , Sarem Women’s Hospital, Tehran, Iran
Correspondence
Article History
Received: September 23, 2014Accepted: January 5, 2016
ePublished: February 15, 2017
BRIEF TEXT
Among the contraceptive methods, the use of intrauterine device (IUD) is one of the most effective, safe and economical methods of preventing pregnancy.
… [1]. In the use of IUD, as with any other prevention method, this method can also be associated with complications and problems such as uterine perforation, which is related to how to place the IUD (it happens approximately in 0.06 of cases of using CuT 380A IUD and 0.11% of using Progestasert IUD), dysmenorrhea, and increased menstrual bleeding (which accounts for 10-15% of IUD containing cupper), an increased risk of pelvic inflammatory diseases in the first 20 days of insertion, displacement, ectopic pregnancy, actinomycosis and pregnancy (in the classic form less than 2% of the cases) [2, 3]. Pregnancy is associated with problems such as increased risk of low child`s weight, early delivery, and abortion in the presence of IUD [4]. In some cases bladder perforation has also been reported [5]. Perhaps, the biggest failure in IUD, is person`s pregnancy [6]. Our personal experience, in ultrasound evaluation of these individuals has shown that in most cases, a pregnancy sac has been formed in the space between the fundus of uterus and the IUD. The Rotating withdrawal technique used in this study by minimizing this distance would minimize the possibility of IUD displacement and could be effective increasing the effectiveness of this device.
The aim of this study was to introduce Rotating withdrawal technique for the first time that was studied to reduce the problems and complications of using IUD use.
This research is a historical cohort study.
This research was performed on women who referred to Sarem Medical Center between 1985 and 1995 for whom IUD had been placed.
The number of samples was 1199. All patients had a history of recurrent pelvic infections, severe dysmenorrhea, menorrhagia, anemia, coagulation disorders, uterine anomalies and ectopic pregnancies before IUD placement. The use of IYD was not recommended in women with the above mentioned records, women who did not have a history of childbirth, and those who complained of oligomenorrhea and polymenorrhea.
Possible complications of IUD use were described in these patients and their informed consent was obtained. Subsequently, gynecological examinations, pelvic examination (for examining the size and condition of the pelvis) and the preparation of Pap smear carried out a month before the device was inserted. In the meantime, if cervical swelling was present, necessary treatment was done and the placement of IUD was delay until complete recovery. After these steps, patients were advised to come for placement at day 4-5 of their menstruation. Method of placement: finally, placement was done precisely as follows. The patient was placed in lithotomy position and the cervix was completely opened using the Speculum. Then, the vagina and cervix was sterilized with 10% Povidone iodine solution and the anterior cervix was held by Tenaculum. A gentle stretching was applied to remove the angle between the cervical canal and the uterine cavity, and then the depth and internal length of the uterus was measured. IUD was placed in the inserter and slowly slipped into the cervical and endometrial canal to be contacted with the uterine fundus. Then, with a gentle and continuous rotation with stretching, the Inserter tube was released and removed from plunger. The IUD was held in place be the rod while pulling the inserter tube, and the contact between the IUD and fundus of womb was carefully preserved until the placement was complete. The IUD thread was cut so that it was about 2 centimeter visible from the cervix. Then, the tenaculum was freed and speculum was excreted and antiprostoglandin was prescribed for uterine pain and contractions, and a 5-day period of doxycycline was prescribed for prevention of possible infections. Patient follow up was performed one month after placement on day 4-5 menstruation. In this way, transabdominal sonography was performed for patients to examine the status of IUD in the uterine cavity. In this study, if the device was not in contact with the fundus of the uterus, it was removed and a new IUD was inserted. The position and place of the new IUD in the uterine cavity was followed by abdominal ultrasonography during the next menstrual period. In cases where the device`s contact with fundus of the uterus was reduced or replaced, IUD was removed and patients were advised to use other contraceptive methods. In cases where the IUD position was normal, the patient was asked to refer there every 6 months to follow up and visit. During these visits, gynecological examination was carried out and the IUD thread was checked and probable problems such as infection, pregnancy, bleeding, or patient complaint were investigated. Ultrasound scanning of the pelvis was also performed to increase the confidence of the proper placement of IUD in the uterine cavity. Eventually, the IUD was removed after 2 years on day 4-5 of menstruation and a new IUD was inserted into the women who were willing to continue the contraception by this method, and then all the steps again went on. All samples whose information was complete and followed up for 2 years were included in this study.
The mean age of the participant was 28.5±6.5 years. About half of the samples had used Copper T and all IUDs contained copper (Table 1) In follow-up, the amount of displacement in 2 years, was only 20 cases (1.67%) of IUDs, which happened during the first month of placement (Table 2). Of these 20 samples, after re-placement, 4 cases (0.35%) were displaced after a month again. During 2 years, no cases of uterine perforation, spontaneous outflow, and IUD migration to the uterine wall were seen and there was no pregnancy case.
... [7-10]. One of the IUD problems is increased bleeding during menstruation. In Western women, the average volume of menstrual blood is 32 ml which reaches to 52-75 ml with the use of Lipps loop or other non-drug type IUDs. This increase in the use of copper IUD reaches 37-40 ml in the first month which then diminishes its amount [11]. Ectopic pregnancy is another complication of IUD. Studies have shown that among various prevention methods, 50% of pregnancies are ectopic [12]. In another study, for 5 years, those who use the types of (levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine contraceptive device) IUD were compared with those who used another type which was Nova T Copper-Releasing Device. It was found that pregnancy was 5.8% for Nova T and it was 0.5% for LNG-IUD [13]. A case of pregnancy and the consequent ectopic pregnancy was not seen in this study. Displacement is one of the other complications of IUD use. In a widespread research conducted in Yugoslavia, after 2 years, the IUD displacement was 4.49% and 13.29% in copper type and standardized non-copper ones respectively [14]. This ratio was reported at 1.67% (once displacement) after 2 years in this study and all cases were related to the first month after placement. 0.35% of the cases had twice displacement during the first 2 months after placement. Thereafter, until the end of the 2 years, there was no case of displacement. The displacement of the IUD may be in or out of the uterus that the ectopic displacement is associated with higher risk of pregnancy. In a hospital respective study, it was found that about 18% of cases of IUD displacement has been ectopic that about 43% of ectopic displacement has led to the pregnancy [15]. Pregnancy should be considered as the main complication or better to say, the IUD defeat. The failure rate of various contraceptive methods in different countries was compared after one year [16] (Table 3). As it can be seen, IUD is one of the most successful methods of contraception. In some societies such as China, the reasons for failure, are planned pregnancy to fight population control program. In such a way that people become pregnant before using the preventing methods which not related to the contraceptive methods [17]. … [18].
Conducting this project in form of prospective cohort and comparison of this technique with other IUD types, and more samples are suggested.
The use of Rotating withdrawal technique, with care and patience, can minimize the incidence of pregnancy during IUD use. Therefore, in addition to the quality of the IUD, placement method can also increase its effectiveness.
Thanks and appreciation to all the staff at Sarem Medical Center who helped us with this research.
TABLES and CHARTS
Show attach fileCITIATION LINKS
[1]Toppozada M, el-Sahwi S, Kamel M, Riad W, Gaweesh S, Ibrahim I. Prostaglandins and cellular reaction in uterine flushings. II. Effect of PG synthesis inhibition in IUD users. Adv Contracept. 1987;3(4):303-13.
[2]Barwijuk AJ, Czekanowski R. A case of pelvic actinomycosis in a woman as a complication of long-term IUD use. Ginekol Pol. 1994;65(4):204-6.
[3]Timonen H, Kurppa K. IUD perforation leading to obstructive nephropathy necessitating nephrectomy: A rare complication. Adv Contracept. 1987;3(1):71-5.
[4]Grimes DA. Rates of birth defect(s) and exposure to IUD during pregnancy. Contraception. 2004;69(4):343.
[5]Gillis E, Chhiv N, Kang S, Sayegh R, Lotfipour S. Case of urethral foreign body: IUD perforation of the bladder with calculus formation. Cal J Emerg Med, 2006;7(3):47-53.
[6]Sanyal R, Banerjee S, Taori K, Pregnancy and IUD in different horns of the uterus. J Clin Ultrasound. 2007;35(1):40-1.
[7]No authors listed. Intrauterine devices: An effective alternative to oral hormonal contraception. Prescrire Int. 2009;18(101):125-30.
[8]Weiss E. Moore K. An assessment of the quality of information available on the internet about the IUD and the potential impact on contraceptive choices. Contraception. 2003;68(5):359-64.
[9]Schwarz EB, Kavanaugh M, Douglas E, Dubowitz T, Creinin MD. Interest in intrauterine contraception among seekers of emergency contraception and pregnancy testing. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;113(4):833-9.
[10]Barbariyan A. Population and family planning. Tehran: Noor-e-Danesh Publication; 2007. [Persian]
[11]Wildemeersch D, Rowe PJ. Assessment of menstrual blood loss in Belgian users of the frameless copper-releasing IUD with copper surface area of 200 mm2 and users of a copper- levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system. Contraception. 2004;70(2):169-72.
[12]Dunn JSJR, Zerbe MJ, Bloomquist JL, Ellerkman RM, Bent AE. Ectopic IUD complicating pregnancy. A case report. J Reprod Med. 2002;47(1):57-9.
[13]Andersson K, Odlind V, Rybo G. Levonorgestrel-releasing and copper-releasing (Nova T) IUDs during five years of use: A randomized comparative trial. Contraception. 1994;49(1):56-72.
[14]Andersson K, Odlind V, Rybo G. The effect of adding copper onto Lippes Loop IUDs: Results from a ten-year study in Yugoslavia. Contraception. 1991;43(3):229-39.
[15]Hasanain FH. The misplaced IUD. Int J Gynaecol Obstet, 2002;78(3):251-2.
[16]Cleland J. Ali MM. Reproductive consequences of contraceptive failure in 19 developing countries. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;104(2):314-20.
[17]Wang D. Contraceptive failure in China. Contraception, 2002;66(3):173-8.
[18]Thonneau P, Goulard H, Goyaux N. Risk factors for intrauterine device failure: A review. Contraception. 2001;64(1):33-7.
[2]Barwijuk AJ, Czekanowski R. A case of pelvic actinomycosis in a woman as a complication of long-term IUD use. Ginekol Pol. 1994;65(4):204-6.
[3]Timonen H, Kurppa K. IUD perforation leading to obstructive nephropathy necessitating nephrectomy: A rare complication. Adv Contracept. 1987;3(1):71-5.
[4]Grimes DA. Rates of birth defect(s) and exposure to IUD during pregnancy. Contraception. 2004;69(4):343.
[5]Gillis E, Chhiv N, Kang S, Sayegh R, Lotfipour S. Case of urethral foreign body: IUD perforation of the bladder with calculus formation. Cal J Emerg Med, 2006;7(3):47-53.
[6]Sanyal R, Banerjee S, Taori K, Pregnancy and IUD in different horns of the uterus. J Clin Ultrasound. 2007;35(1):40-1.
[7]No authors listed. Intrauterine devices: An effective alternative to oral hormonal contraception. Prescrire Int. 2009;18(101):125-30.
[8]Weiss E. Moore K. An assessment of the quality of information available on the internet about the IUD and the potential impact on contraceptive choices. Contraception. 2003;68(5):359-64.
[9]Schwarz EB, Kavanaugh M, Douglas E, Dubowitz T, Creinin MD. Interest in intrauterine contraception among seekers of emergency contraception and pregnancy testing. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;113(4):833-9.
[10]Barbariyan A. Population and family planning. Tehran: Noor-e-Danesh Publication; 2007. [Persian]
[11]Wildemeersch D, Rowe PJ. Assessment of menstrual blood loss in Belgian users of the frameless copper-releasing IUD with copper surface area of 200 mm2 and users of a copper- levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system. Contraception. 2004;70(2):169-72.
[12]Dunn JSJR, Zerbe MJ, Bloomquist JL, Ellerkman RM, Bent AE. Ectopic IUD complicating pregnancy. A case report. J Reprod Med. 2002;47(1):57-9.
[13]Andersson K, Odlind V, Rybo G. Levonorgestrel-releasing and copper-releasing (Nova T) IUDs during five years of use: A randomized comparative trial. Contraception. 1994;49(1):56-72.
[14]Andersson K, Odlind V, Rybo G. The effect of adding copper onto Lippes Loop IUDs: Results from a ten-year study in Yugoslavia. Contraception. 1991;43(3):229-39.
[15]Hasanain FH. The misplaced IUD. Int J Gynaecol Obstet, 2002;78(3):251-2.
[16]Cleland J. Ali MM. Reproductive consequences of contraceptive failure in 19 developing countries. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;104(2):314-20.
[17]Wang D. Contraceptive failure in China. Contraception, 2002;66(3):173-8.
[18]Thonneau P, Goulard H, Goyaux N. Risk factors for intrauterine device failure: A review. Contraception. 2001;64(1):33-7.