Search

Copyright of European Journal of Contraception & Reproductive Health Care is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Objective: Two low-dose levonorgestrel intrauterine contraceptive systems (LNG-IUSs; total content 13.5 mg [average approx. 8 μg/24 hours over the first year; LNG-IUS 8] and total content 19.5 mg [average approx. 13 μg/24 hours over the first year; LNG-IUS 13]) have previously been shown to be highly effective (3-year Pearl Indices: 0.33 and 0.31, respectively), safe and well tolerated. The present subgroup analyses evaluated whether or not outcomes were affected by parity, age (18–25 vs 26–35 years), or body mass index (BMI, <30 vs ≥30 kg/m2). Methods: Nulliparous and parous women aged 18‒35 years with regular menstrual cycles (21‒35 days) requesting contraception were randomized to 3 years of LNG-IUS 8 or LNG-IUS 13 use. Results: In the LNG-IUS 8 and LNG-IUS 13 groups, 1432 and 1452 women, respectively, had a placement attempted and were included in the full analysis set; 39.2%, 39.2% and 17.1% were 18–25 years old, nulliparous and had a BMI ≥30 kg/m2, respectively. Both systems were similarly effective regardless of age, parity or BMI; the subgroup Pearl Indices had widely overlapping 95% confidence intervals. Placement of LNG-IUS 8 and LNG-IUS 13 was easier (p < 0.0001) and less painful (p < 0.0001) in women who had delivered vaginally than in women who had not. The complete/partial expulsion rate was 2.2–4.2% across all age and parity subgroups and higher in parous than in nulliparous women (p = 0.004). The incidence of pelvic inflammatory disease was 0.1–0.6% across all age and parity subgroups: nulliparous and younger women were not at higher risk than parous and older women, respectively. The ectopic pregnancy rate was 0.3–0.4% across all age and parity subgroups. Across all age and parity subgroups, the 3-year completion rate was 50.9–61.3% for LNG-IUS 8 and 57.9–61.1% for LNG-IUS 13, and was higher (p = 0.0001) among older than younger women in the LNG-IUS 8 group only. Conclusions: LNG-IUS 8 and LNG-IUS 13 were highly effective, safe and well tolerated regardless of age or parity. Trial Registration: Clinical trials.gov [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A letter to the editor is presented in response to an article on the high rates of discontinuation and dissatisfaction with the levonorgestrel intrauterine system (LNG-IU), in the 2009 issue.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of two low-dose levonorgestrel intrauterine contraceptive systems. METHODS: Nulliparous and parous women aged 18-35 years with regular menstrual cycles (21-35 days) requesting contraception were randomized to 3 years of treatment with one of two levonorgestrel intrauterine contraceptive systems: 13.5 mg total content or 19.5 mg total content. The primary outcome was the pregnancy rate, calculated as the Pearl Index. RESULTS: Overall, 1,432 and 1,452 women in the 13.5 mg intrauterine contraceptive system and 19.5 mg intrauterine contraceptive system groups, respectively, had a placement attempted and were included in the full analysis set to evaluate efficacy and safety. Mean (standard deviation) age was 27.1 (4.8) years; 39.2% were nulliparous. Over the 3-year study period, 0.33 pregnancies per 100 women-years (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.16-0.60) were observed with the 13.5 mg intrauterine contraceptive system compared with 0.31 per 100 women-years (95% CI 0.15-0.57) with the 19.5 mg intrauterine contraceptive system. Kaplan-Meier estimates for that period were 0.009 and 0.010, respectively. At least partial expulsions occurred in 4.56% and 3.58% and discontinuation rates resulting from a reported adverse event occurred in 21.9% and 19.1%, respectively. Ten of the 20 pregnancies were ectopic. Serious adverse events included six cases of pelvic inflammatory disease and one partial uterine perforation. CONCLUSIONS: Both lower-dose levonorgestrel intrauterine contraceptive systems were highly effective for 3 years of use and generally well tolerated. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00528112. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To compare the levonorgestrel intrauterine system (LNG-IUS 8), which has an average levonorgestrel release rate of ∼8 μg/24 hours during the first year (total levonorgestrel content 13.5 mg; Jaydess/Skyla), with the etonogestrel (ENG) subdermal implant (total content, 68 mg) with regard to the 12-month discontinuation rate (primary outcome).Design: Randomized, open-label, phase III study.Setting: Thirty-eight centers in six European countries.Patient(s): Study population of 766 healthy nulliparous and parous women aged 18-35 years.Intervention(s): The LNG-IUS 8 or the ENG implant.Main Outcome Measure(s): Discontinuation rate, by treatment group, at Month 12.Result(s): The 12-month discontinuation rates were 19.6% and 26.8% in the LNG-IUS 8 and ENG implant groups, respectively. The -7.2% difference was statistically significant (95% confidence interval -13.2%, -1.2%). Fewer women in the LNG-IUS 8 group than in the ENG implant group discontinued because of increased bleeding (3.2% vs. 11.3%) or adverse events (14.3% vs. 21.8%). At 12 months, more women in the LNG-IUS 8 group than in the ENG implant group were "very/somewhat satisfied" with their bleeding pattern (60.9% vs. 33.6%) and reported a preference to use their study treatment after study completion (70.1% vs. 58.5%).Conclusion(s): The LNG-IUS 8 was associated with a significantly lower 12-month discontinuation rate compared with the ENG implant; mainly because ENG implant users frequently discontinued due to increased bleeding. More LNG-IUS 8 users than ENG implant users reported being "very/somewhat satisfied" with their bleeding pattern, and reported a preference to continue using their study treatment after the study.Clinical Trial Registration Number: NCT01397097. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]