Copper IUD

Last updated

Copper IUD
IUD with scale.jpg
Photo of a common IUD (Paragard T 380A)
Background
TypeIntrauterine
First use1970s [1]
Trade names copper-T, ParaGard, others
AHFS/Drugs.com FDA Professional Drug Information
Failure rates (first year)
Perfect use0.6% [2]
Typical use0.8% [2]
Usage
Duration effect5–12+ years [1]
Reversibilityrapid [1]
User reminders?
Clinic reviewAnnually
Advantages and disadvantages
STI protectionNo
PeriodsMay be heavier and more painful [3]
BenefitsUnnecessary to take any daily action.
Emergency contraception if inserted within 5 days
Risks<1 in 100: pelvic infection within 20 days of insertion
1.1 in 1000: uterine perforation

A copper intrauterine device (IUD), also known as an intrauterine coil,copper coil, or non-hormonal IUD, is a form of long-acting reversible contraception and one of the most effective forms of birth control available. [4] [3] It can also be used for emergency contraception within five days of unprotected sex. [3] The device is placed in the uterus and lasts up to twelve years, depending on the amount of copper present in the device. [3] [1] It may be used for contraception regardless of age or previous pregnancy, and may be placed immediately after a vaginal delivery, cesarean delivery, or surgical abortion. [5] [6] Following its removal, fertility quickly returns. [1]

Contents

Common side effects include heavy menstrual periods and increased menstrual cramps (dysmenorrhea). Rarely, the device may come out or perforate the uterine wall. [3] [1]

The copper IUD was initially developed in Germany in the early 1900s, but came into widespread medical use in the 1970s. [1] It is on the World Health Organization's List of Essential Medicines. [7] [8]

Medical uses

Copper IUDs are a form of long-acting reversible contraception and are one of the most effective forms of birth control available. [4] [9] The type of frame and amount of copper in the device can affect the effectiveness of different copper IUD models. [10]

The copper IUD is effective as contraception as soon as it is inserted, and loses efficacy when removed or if it becomes malpositioned. [11] The effectiveness of the copper IUD (failure rate of 0.8%) is comparable to tubal sterilization (failure rate of 0.5%) for the first year. [12] [13] [11] The failure rates for different models vary between 0.1 and 2.2% after one year of use. The T-shaped models with a surface area of 380 mm2 of copper have the lowest failure rates. The TCu 380A (Paragard) has a one-year failure rate of 0.8% and a cumulative 12-year failure rate of 2.2%. [10] Over 12 years of use, the models with less surface area of copper have higher failure rates. The TCu 220A has a 12-year failure rate of 5.8%. The frameless GyneFix has a failure rate of less than 1% per year. [14] A 2008 review of the available T-shaped copper IUDs recommended that the TCu 380A and the TCu 280S be used as the first choice for copper IUDs because those two models have the lowest failure rates and the longest lifespans. [10] Worldwide, older IUD models with lower effectiveness rates are no longer produced. [15]

Though only approved by regulatory agencies for a maximum of 12 years, some devices may be effective with continuous use for up to 20 years. [16]

Because it does not contain hormones, the copper IUD does not disrupt the timing of an individual's menstrual cycle, nor does it prevent ovulation. [4]

Emergency contraception

It was first discovered in 1976 that the copper IUD could be used as a form of emergency contraception (EC). [17] The copper IUD is the most effective form of emergency contraception, more effective than oral hormonal emergency contraception, including mifepristone, ulipristal acetate, and levonorgestrel. [18] [19] Efficacy is not affected by user weight. [11] The pregnancy rate among those using the copper IUD for emergency contraception is 0.09%. It can be used for emergency contraception up to five days after unprotected sex, and does not decrease in effectiveness during the five days. [20] An additional advantage of using the copper IUD for emergency contraception is that it can then be used as a form of birth control for 10–12 years after insertion. [20]

Removal and return to fertility

Removal of the copper IUD should be performed by a qualified medical practitioner. Fertility has been shown to return to previous levels quickly after removal of the device. [21]

Side effects and complications

Complications

The most common complications related to the copper IUD are expulsion, perforation, and infection. Infertility after discontinuation and difficulty breastfeeding during use are not associated with the copper IUD. [11] [21]

Expulsion rates can range from 2.2% to 11.4% of users from the first year to the 10th year. The TCu 380A may have lower rates of expulsion than other models, and the frameless copper IUD has a similar rate of expulsion to models with frames. [22] [23] Expulsion is more likely with immediate or early postpartum or post-abortal placement. [24] [25] In the postpartum period, expulsion is less likely when the device is placed less than ten minutes after the placenta is delivered, or when inserted after a cesarean delivery. [16] Unusual vaginal discharge, cramping or pain, spotting between periods, postcoital (after sex) spotting, pain during intercourse (dyspareunia), or the absence or lengthening of the strings can be signs of a possible expulsion. [21] As with intentional removal, the device is immediately ineffective after expulsion. If an IUD with copper is inserted after an expulsion has occurred, the risk of re-expulsion has been estimated in one study to be approximately one third of cases after one year. [26] Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) may cause dislocation of a copper IUD, and it is therefore recommended to check the location of the IUD both before and after MRI. [27]

Transvaginal ultrasonography showing a perforated copper IUD as a hyperechoic (rendered as bright) line at right, 3 centimeters away from the uterus at left. The IUD is surrounded by a hypoechoic (dark) foreign-body granuloma. Perforated IUD.jpg
Transvaginal ultrasonography showing a perforated copper IUD as a hyperechoic (rendered as bright) line at right, 3 centimeters away from the uterus at left. The IUD is surrounded by a hypoechoic (dark) foreign-body granuloma.

Perforation of the device through the uterine wall typically occurs at the time of placement, though it may occur spontaneously during the period of use. Estimates of the rate of perforation vary from 1.1 per 1000 to 1 per 3000 copper IUD insertions. [1] [11] Perforation may be slightly more common in people using the copper IUD while breastfeeding. [28]

Due to its inflammatory mechanism of action, a copper IUD that has completely perforated typically requires surgical removal due to the formation of dense adhesions around the device. A device embedded in the uterine wall may be removed hysteroscopically or surgically. [1] [16]

The insertion of a copper IUD poses a transient risk of pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) for 21 days, though this is almost always in the setting of undiagnosed gonorrhea or chlamydia infection at the time of insertion. This occurs in less than 1 in 100 insertions. Beyond this time frame there is no increased risk of PID associated with copper IUD use. [16] [29] [11] [30] [21] Postpartum insertion of a copper IUD is not associated with increased risk of infection, provided that the delivery was not complicated by an infection such as chorioamnionitis. [16]

Side effects

The most common side effects reported with use of the copper IUD are increased menstrual bleeding and menstrual cramps, both of which may remit after 3–6 months of use. Less frequently, intermenstrual bleeding may occur, especially in the first 3–6 months of use. [11] [21] [31] The increase in menstrual blood volume varies in different studies but is reported to be as low as 20% and as high as 55%; however, there is no evidence for a concomitant change in ferritin, hemoglobin, or hematocrit. [1] [11]

Menorrhagia (increased menstrual bleeding) and dysmenorrhea (painful menstrual bleeding) are typically treated with NSAID medications including naproxen, ibuprofen, and mefenamic acid. [32] [16]

Contraceptive failure

Transvaginal ultrasonography visualizing an IUD with copper in the optimal location within the uterus. Ultrasonography of IUD with copper.jpg
Transvaginal ultrasonography visualizing an IUD with copper in the optimal location within the uterus.

The absolute risk of ectopic pregnancy with IUD use is lower than with no contraception due to the dramatically decreased rate of pregnancy overall. However, when pregnancy does occur with a copper IUD in place, a higher percentage of those pregnancies are ectopic, from 3% to 6%, a two to sixfold increase. This corresponds to an absolute rate of ectopic pregnancy in copper IUD users of 0.2–0.4 per 1000 person-years, compared to 3 per 1000 person-years in the population using no contraception. [33] [11] [1]

If a pregnancy continues with the IUD in place, there is an increased risk of complications including preterm delivery, chorioamnionitis, and spontaneous abortion. If the IUD is removed, these risks are lower, especially the risks of bleeding and miscarriage; the rate of miscarriage approaches that of the general population depending on study population. [33] [1] [11]

Overall failure rates with the copper IUD are low, and are mainly dependent on the surface area of copper in the device. After 12 years of continuous use, the TCu 380A device has a cumulative pregnancy rate of 1.7%. [1] The TCu 380A is more effective than the MLCu375, MLCu350, TCu220, and TCu200. The TCu 380S is more effective than the TCu 380A. [34] The frameless device has similar failure rates to conventional devices. [14]

Contraindications

The copper IUD is considered safe and effective during lactation and in those who have never been pregnant. In the World Health Organization (WHO) Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use, category 3 contraindications (risk typically outweighs benefit) and category 4 contraindications (unacceptable health risk) are listed for the copper IUD. Category 3 contraindications include untreated HIV/AIDS, recent and recurrent exposure to gonorrhea or chlamydia without adequate treatment, benign gestational trophoblastic disease, and ovarian cancer. Category 4 contraindications besides pregnancy and active genital tract infections (e.g. pelvic tuberculosis, sexually transmitted infections, endometritis) include malignant gestational trophoblastic disease, abnormal uterine bleeding, active cervical cancer, Wilson's disease, and active endometrial cancer. HIV infection is not itself a contraindication, as long as it is treated. There are no known drug interactions between the copper IUD and anti-retroviral medications. [16] [35] [36]

Device description

A variety of IUDs Multiload-Gynefix-Paragard.jpg
A variety of IUDs

There are various of models of copper IUDs available around the world. Most copper devices consist of a plastic (polyethylene) core that is wrapped in a copper wire. [10] Many of the devices have a T-shape similar to the hormonal IUD. However, there are "frameless" copper IUDs available as well, the most popular of which is marketed as GyneFix. Early copper IUDs had copper around only the vertical stem, but more recent models have copper sleeves wrapped around the horizontal arms as well, increasing copper surface area and thereby effectiveness. [37] [38]

Insertion

A copper IUD can be inserted at any phase of the menstrual cycle, as long as pregnancy can be reliably excluded. It may be inserted in the immediate postpartum period (shortly after delivery of the placenta), and after an induced medical, surgical, or spontaneous abortion provided a genital tract infection can be reliably excluded. [25] [11] [39] [5] [24] NSAIDs taken prior to the procedure and use of local anesthesia are recommended to reduce pain at the time of insertion. [15] [40] [29]

Types

Many different types of copper IUDs are currently manufactured worldwide, but availability varies by country.

IUDTypeWidth

(mm)

Length (mm)Copper (mm2)Life (years)ManufacturerDistinguishing characteristics
Gyneplus Cu 380T-shaped3805Dispo.Cont.
Multiload Cu375 (MLCu375)U-shaped20.5 [41] 353755Multilan
Multiload Cu250 (MLCu250)U-shaped2503Multilan
Multi-Safe 375U-shaped19.5 [42] 32.53755Mona Lisa N.V.
Multi-Safe 375 Short LoopU-shaped19,529,43755Mona Lisa N.V.
Load 375U-shaped19.5 [42] 32.537557-MED Industrie
Nova-T 380T-shaped (plain)32 [43] 323805Bayer
Neo-Safe T 380T-shaped (plain)32 [42] 323805Mona Lisa N.V.
Neo-Safe T 380 MiniT-shaped (plain)24 [44] 303805Mona Lisa N.V.
UT 380T-shaped (plain)32 [42] 323805Laboratoire CCD
UT 380 ShortT-shaped (plain)32 [42] 28.43805Laboratoire CCD
Flexi-T 300T-shaped (plain)23 [45] 293005Prosan
Flexi-T + 300T-shaped (plain)28 [45] 323005ProsanWider arms than Flexi-T 300
T-safe CU 380AT-shaped (banded)31.8 [42] 35.838010Mona Lisa N.V.
T-safe CU 380A QLT-shaped (banded)31.8 [42] 35.838010Mona Lisa N.V.
Flexi-T + 380T-shaped (banded)28 [45] 323805Prosan
TT 380 SlimlineT-shaped (banded)31.8 [42] 35.8380107-MED Industrie
TT 380 MiniT-shaped (banded)23.2 [42] 29.538057-MED Industrie
ParagardT-shaped (banded)32 [46] 3638010DuramedOnly copper IUD approved by the US FDA[ citation needed ]
Gynefix 330Frameless2.2 [42] 303305ContrelOnly frameless IUD brand available[ citation needed ]
Gynefix 200Frameless2005ContrelOnly frameless IUD brand available[ citation needed ]
IUB SCu300A/BSpherical (3D)3005OCONNitinol alloy cored frame. Brand name is Ballerine.
SMB TCu 380AT-shaped (banded)32 [47] 3638010SMB corpWHO UNFPA Prequalified IUD Manufacturer
Protect TCu 380AT-shaped (banded)38012SMB corpWHO UNFPA Prequalified IUD Manufacturer
Protect Multi-arm Cu 375 standardU-shaped3755SMB corpWHO UNFPA Prequalified IUD Manufacturer
Protect Multi-arm Cu 375 shortU-shaped3755SMB corpWHO UNFPA Prequalified IUD Manufacturer

Frameless IUDs

Gynefix 200 frameless IUD GyneFix 200 Kupferkette.jpg
Gynefix 200 frameless IUD

The frameless IUD eliminates the use of the frame that gives conventional IUDs their signature T-shape. This change in design was made to reduce discomfort and expulsion risk associated with prior IUDs; without a solid frame, the frameless IUD should mold to the shape of the uterus. It may reduce expulsion and discontinuation rates compared to framed copper IUDs. [48]

Gynefix is the only frameless IUD brand currently available. It consists of hollow copper tubes on a polypropylene thread. It is inserted through the cervix with a special applicator that anchors the thread to the fundus (top) of the uterus; the thread is then cut with a tail hanging outside of the cervix, similar to framed IUDs, or looped back into the cervical canal for patient comfort. When this tail is pulled, the anchor is released and the device can be removed. This requires more force than removing a T-shaped IUD, but results in comparable discomfort at the time of removal. [49]

Mechanism of action

A diagram showing a copper IUD in place in the uterus. Iuddiagram.jpg
A diagram showing a copper IUD in place in the uterus.

The copper IUD's primary mechanism of action is to prevent fertilization. [11] [21] [50] [51] [52] Copper causes a localized inflammatory response, which is spermicidal and causes the endometrium to be inhospitable. [11] [21] [16] [50]

Spermatozoa entering the uterine cavity and cervical mucus are consumed by local phagocytes, and are also directly killed by copper ions and lysosome contents. Presence of copper ions disrupts sperm motility, rendering fertilization improbable. [1]

Although not a primary mechanism of action, copper may disrupt embryonic implantation, [11] [53] especially when used for emergency contraception. [54] [55] However, if implantation occurs, there is no evidence that copper affects subsequent development of a pregnancy or causes embryonic failure. [11] [50] Therefore, the copper IUD is considered to be a true contraceptive and not an abortifacient. [11] [21]

Usage

Globally, the IUD is the most widely used method of reversible birth control. As of 2020, 161 million people used IUDs worldwide (including both non-hormonal and hormonal IUDs). As of 2020, IUDs were the most popular method of contraception in fourteen countries, mostly in Central and East Asia. [56]

In Europe, as of 2006, copper IUD prevalence ranged from under 5% in the United Kingdom, Germany, and Austria to over 10% in Denmark and the Baltic States. [57]

History

Precursors to IUDs were first reported in the early 1900s. Developed from stem or wishbone pessaries, which were made of firm rubber or metal and had an anchor in the cervix, the stem on these devices extended into the uterine cavity. They were associated with high rates of genital tract infection, especially gonorrhea, and were not widely adopted. [58]

The first intrauterine device to be contained entirely within the uterus was described in a German publication in 1909 by Richard Richter, who reported a ring-shaped device made of silk sutures with two ends protruding from the external os of the cervix for removal. A similar design was reported by Karl Pust, who wound the free ends of the suture tightly and attached them to a glass disc, which covered the external os. Ersatz versions were made using silk suture wrapped into a ring and embedded in a gelatin capsule, which was inserted into the uterus, where the gelatin dissolved. [58]

In 1929, Ernst Gräfenberg of Germany published a report on an IUD made of silk sutures (Gräfenberg's ring), initially with a small amount of silver wire attached for visualization on x-ray, and then completely covered in silver wire. Because the silver was absorbed systemically and deposited in other tissues, causing a discoloration known as argyria, the device was then recreated with an alloy of copper, nickel, and zinc (then called German silver, also known as nickel silver). It was widely used in the UK and the Commonwealth, but discouraged from use in the US and Europe due to the perceived risk of infection, cancer, and inefficacy. [59] [58]

In 1934, Japanese physician Tenrei Ota developed a variation of Gräfenberg's ring that contained a supportive structure in the center. The addition of this central disc lowered the IUD's expulsion rate and increased the surface area. Though his research was hampered by the fascist government's stance against contraception and his need to spend time in hiding, after World War II he returned to the development of IUDs. Gold and silver, which had been used by Gräfenberg, were in very short supply in post-war Japan, which led Ota to other metals, silk, and nylon. By the end of the 1950s, there were 32 different frame shapes used in Japan, and larger studies showed no connection between these devices and development of endometrial cancer, which had been a theoretical concern due to the inflammatory properties of metals in the uterus. Ota's devices were used in Japan until the 1980s. [60] [58]

The first plastic device was developed by Lazar Margulies and first trialed in 1959; it was made of a polyethylene ring filled with a radiopaque solution. The appearance gave rise to the colloquial term "coil", which persists despite the change in appearance of modern IUDs. Due to its size (6 mm), the cervix had to be dilated prior to insertion, it was poorly tolerated, and the device was prone to expulsion. Margulies modified it to add a beaded tail in 1962. [37] [58]

The Lippes Loop, a slightly smaller plastic device with a monofilament tail, was introduced in 1962 and gained in popularity over the Margulies device. [61]

Stainless steel was introduced as an alternative to the copper-nickel-zinc alloy in the 1960s and 70s, [58] and was subsequently widely used in China because of low manufacturing costs. The Chinese government banned production of steel IUDs in 1993 due to high failure rates (up to 10% per year). [15] [62]

American obstetrician Howard Tatum conceived the plastic T-shaped IUD in 1967, [63] but its high failure rate (approximately 18%) made it nonviable. [58] [64] Shortly thereafter Jaime Zipper, a Chilean doctor, discovered that the nickel silver alloy had spermicidal properties due to its copper percentage, and added a copper sheath to the plastic T, bringing the failure rate to approximately 1%. [58] [61] [65] It was found that copper-containing devices could be made in smaller sizes without compromising effectiveness, resulting in fewer side effects such as pain and bleeding. [15] T-shaped devices had lower rates of expulsion due to their greater similarity to the shape of the uterus. [66]

Tatum developed many different models of the copper IUD. He created the TCu 220 C, which had copper collars as opposed to a copper filament, which prevented metal loss and increased the lifespan of the device. Second generation copper-T IUDs were also introduced in the 1970s. These devices had higher surface areas of copper, and for the first time consistently achieved effectiveness rates of greater than 99%. [15] The last model Tatum developed was the TCu 380A, the model that is most recommended today. [10]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Emergency contraception</span> Birth control measures taken after sexual intercourse

Emergency contraception (EC) is a birth control measure, used after sexual intercourse to prevent pregnancy.

Tubal ligation is a surgical procedure for female sterilization in which the fallopian tubes are permanently blocked, clipped or removed. This prevents the fertilization of eggs by sperm and thus the implantation of a fertilized egg. Tubal ligation is considered a permanent method of sterilization and birth control.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Dalkon Shield</span> Form of Intrauterine Device(IUD)

The Dalkon Shield was a contraceptive intrauterine device (IUD) developed by the Dalkon Corporation and marketed by the A.H. Robins Company. The Dalkon Shield was found to cause severe injury to a disproportionately large percentage of women, which eventually led to numerous lawsuits, in which juries awarded millions of dollars in compensatory and punitive damages.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Dysmenorrhea</span> Pain during and sometimes before menstruation

Dysmenorrhea, also known as period pain, painful periods or menstrual cramps, is pain during menstruation. Its usual onset occurs around the time that menstruation begins. Symptoms typically last less than three days. The pain is usually in the pelvis or lower abdomen. Other symptoms may include back pain, diarrhea or nausea.

Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB), previously known as menorrhagia or hematomunia, is a menstrual period with excessively heavy flow. It is a type of abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Levonorgestrel</span> Hormonal medication used for birth control

Levonorgestrel is a hormonal medication which is used in a number of birth control methods. It is combined with an estrogen to make combination birth control pills. As an emergency birth control, sold under the brand names Plan B One-Step and Julie, among others, it is useful within 72 hours of unprotected sex. The more time that has passed since sex, the less effective the medication becomes, and it does not work after pregnancy (implantation) has occurred. Levonorgestrel works by preventing ovulation or fertilization from occurring. It decreases the chances of pregnancy by 57–93%. In an intrauterine device (IUD), such as Mirena among others, it is effective for the long-term prevention of pregnancy. A levonorgestrel-releasing implant is also available in some countries.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hormonal intrauterine device</span> Intrauterine device

A hormonal intrauterine device (IUD), also known as an intrauterine system (IUS) with progestogen and sold under the brand name Mirena among others, is an intrauterine device that releases a progestogenic hormonal agent such as levonorgestrel into the uterus. It is used for birth control, heavy menstrual periods, and to prevent excessive build of the lining of the uterus in those on estrogen replacement therapy. It is one of the most effective forms of birth control with a one-year failure rate around 0.2%. The device is placed in the uterus and lasts three to eight years. Fertility often returns quickly following removal.

Progestogen-only pills (POPs), colloquially known as "mini pills", are a type of oral contraceptive that contain synthetic progestogens (progestins) and do not contain estrogens. They are primarily used for the prevention of undesired pregnancy, although additional medical uses also exist.

Extended or continuous cycle combined oral contraceptive pills are a packaging of combined oral contraceptive pills (COCPs) that reduce or eliminate the withdrawal bleeding that would occur once every 28 days in traditionally packaged COCPs. It works by reducing the frequency of the pill-free or placebo days. Extended cycle use of COCPs may also be called menstrual suppression, although other hormonal medications or medication delivery systems may also be used to suppress menses. Any brand of combined oral contraceptive pills can be used in an extended or continuous manner by simply discarding the placebo pills; this is most commonly done with monophasic pills in which all of the pills in a package contain the same fixed dosing of a synthetic estrogen and a progestin in each active pill.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Endometrial ablation</span> Medical procedure

Endometrial ablation is a surgical procedure that is used to remove (ablate) or destroy the endometrial lining of the uterus. The goal of the procedure is to decrease the amount of blood loss during menstruation (periods). Endometrial ablation is most often employed in people with excessive menstrual bleeding following unsuccessful medical therapy. It is less effective than hysterectomy, but with a lower risk of adverse events.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hormonal contraception</span> Birth control methods that act on the endocrine system

Hormonal contraception refers to birth control methods that act on the endocrine system. Almost all methods are composed of steroid hormones, although in India one selective estrogen receptor modulator is marketed as a contraceptive. The original hormonal method—the combined oral contraceptive pill—was first marketed as a contraceptive in 1960. In the ensuing decades, many other delivery methods have been developed, although the oral and injectable methods are by far the most popular. Hormonal contraception is highly effective: when taken on the prescribed schedule, users of steroid hormone methods experience pregnancy rates of less than 1% per year. Perfect-use pregnancy rates for most hormonal contraceptives are usually around the 0.3% rate or less. Currently available methods can only be used by women; the development of a male hormonal contraceptive is an active research area.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Beginning of pregnancy controversy</span> Cultural-linguistic, not scientific question

Controversy over the beginning of pregnancy occurs in different contexts, particularly as it is discussed within the debate of abortion in the United States. Because an abortion is defined as ending an established pregnancy, rather than as destroying a fertilized egg, depending on when pregnancy is considered to begin, some methods of birth control as well as some methods of infertility treatment might be classified as causing abortions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Comparison of birth control methods</span>

There are many methods of birth control that vary in requirements, side effects, and effectiveness. As the technology, education, and awareness about contraception has evolved, new contraception methods have been theorized and put in application. Although no method of birth control is ideal for every user, some methods remain more effective, affordable or intrusive than others. Outlined here are the different types of barrier methods, hormonal methods, various methods including spermicides, emergency contraceptives, and surgical methods and a comparison between them.

Long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARC) are methods of birth control that provide effective contraception for an extended period without requiring user action. They include hormonal and non-hormonal intrauterine devices (IUDs) and subdermal hormonal contraceptive implants. They are the most effective reversible methods of contraception because their efficacy is not reliant on patient compliance. The failure rates of IUDs and implants is less than 1% per year.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Contraceptive implant</span> Implantable medical device used for birth control

A contraceptive implant is an implantable medical device used for the purpose of birth control. The implant may depend on the timed release of hormones to hinder ovulation or sperm development, the ability of copper to act as a natural spermicide within the uterus, or it may work using a non-hormonal, physical blocking mechanism. As with other contraceptives, a contraceptive implant is designed to prevent pregnancy, but it does not protect against sexually transmitted infections.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Birth control</span> Method of preventing human pregnancy

Birth control, also known as contraception, anticonception, and fertility control, is the use of methods or devices to prevent pregnancy. Birth control has been used since ancient times, but effective and safe methods of birth control only became available in the 20th century. Planning, making available, and using human birth control is called family planning. Some cultures limit or discourage access to birth control because they consider it to be morally, religiously, or politically undesirable.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Intrauterine device</span> Form of birth control involving a device placed in the uterus

An intrauterine device (IUD), also known as an intrauterine contraceptive device or coil, is a small, often T-shaped birth control device that is inserted into the uterus to prevent pregnancy. IUDs are a form of long-acting reversible contraception (LARC).

Women's reproductive health in the United States refers to the set of physical, mental, and social issues related to the health of women in the United States. It includes the rights of women in the United States to adequate sexual health, available contraception methods, and treatment for sexually transmitted diseases. The prevalence of women's health issues in American culture is inspired by second-wave feminism in the United States. As a result of this movement, women of the United States began to question the largely male-dominated health care system and demanded a right to information on issues regarding their physiology and anatomy. The U.S. government has made significant strides to propose solutions, like creating the Women's Health Initiative through the Office of Research on Women's Health in 1991. However, many issues still exist related to the accessibility of reproductive healthcare as well as the stigma and controversy attached to sexual health, contraception, and sexually transmitted diseases.

Menstrual suppression refers to the practice of using hormonal management to stop or reduce menstrual bleeding. In contrast to surgical options for this purpose, such as hysterectomy or endometrial ablation, hormonal methods to manipulate menstruation are reversible.

Howard J. Tatum was an American obstetrician. Along with Chilean physician Jaime Zipper, he invented the copper intrauterine device (IUD). The Tatum-T intrauterine device was the first T-shaped copper-bearing IUD to be sold in the United States, and his T-shaped design served as the foundation for other intrauterine devices.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Goodwin TM, Montoro MN, Muderspach L, Paulson R, Roy S (2010). Management of Common Problems in Obstetrics and Gynecology (5 ed.). John Wiley & Sons. pp. 494–496. ISBN   978-1-4443-9034-6. Archived from the original on November 5, 2017.
  2. 1 2 Trussell J (2011). "Contraceptive efficacy" (PDF). In Hatcher RA, Trussell J, Nelson AL, Cates W Jr, Kowal D, Policar MS (eds.). Contraceptive technology (20th revised ed.). New York: Ardent Media. pp. 779–863. ISBN   978-1-59708-004-0. ISSN   0091-9721. OCLC   781956734. Archived (PDF) from the original on February 15, 2017.
  3. 1 2 3 4 5 World Health Organization (2009). Stuart MC, Kouimtzi M, Hill SR (eds.). WHO Model Formulary 2008. World Health Organization. pp. 370–2. hdl: 10665/44053 . ISBN   9789241547659.
  4. 1 2 3 Winner B, Peipert JF, Zhao Q, Buckel C, Madden T, Allsworth JE, et al. (May 2012). "Effectiveness of long-acting reversible contraception". The New England Journal of Medicine. 366 (21): 1998–2007. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1110855 . PMID   22621627. S2CID   16812353. Archived from the original on August 17, 2020. Retrieved August 18, 2019.
  5. 1 2 Lopez LM, Bernholc A, Hubacher D, Stuart G, Van Vliet HA, et al. (Cochrane Fertility Regulation Group) (June 2015). "Immediate postpartum insertion of intrauterine device for contraception". The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2015 (6): CD003036. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD003036.pub3. PMC   10777269 . PMID   26115018.
  6. ↑ British national formulary : BNF 69 (69 ed.). British Medical Association. 2015. pp. 557–559. ISBN   978-0-85711-156-2.
  7. ↑ World Health Organization (2019). World Health Organization model list of essential medicines: 21st list 2019. Geneva: World Health Organization. hdl: 10665/325771 . WHO/MVP/EMP/IAU/2019.06. License: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO.
  8. ↑ Schäfer-Korting M (2010). Drug Delivery. Springer Science & Business Media. p. 290. ISBN   978-3-642-00477-3. Archived from the original on November 5, 2017.
  9. ↑ Hofmeyr GJ, Singata M, Lawrie TA, et al. (Cochrane Fertility Regulation Group) (June 2010). "Copper containing intra-uterine devices versus depot progestogens for contraception". The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2010 (6): CD007043. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD007043.pub2. PMC   8981912 . PMID   20556773.
  10. 1 2 3 4 5 Kulier R, O'Brien PA, Helmerhorst FM, Usher-Patel M, D'Arcangues C (October 2007). "Copper containing, framed intra-uterine devices for contraception". The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (4): CD005347. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD005347.PUB3. PMID   17943851.
  11. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 "Long-Acting Reversible Contraception Implants and Intrauterine Devices: Practice Bulletin #186". American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. 2024. Retrieved January 28, 2025.
  12. ↑ "Contraceptive Use in the United States". The Guttmacher Institute. 2012. Archived from the original on October 4, 2013. Retrieved October 4, 2013.
  13. ↑ Bartz D, Greenberg JA (2008). "Sterilization in the United States". Reviews in Obstetrics & Gynecology. 1 (1): 23–32. PMC   2492586 . PMID   18701927.
  14. 1 2 O'Brien PA, Marfleet C (January 2005). "Frameless versus classical intrauterine device for contraception". The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (1): CD003282. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD003282.pub2. PMID   15674904.
  15. 1 2 3 4 5 "IUDs--an update" (PDF). Population Reports. Series B, Intrauterine Devices (6). Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, Population Information Program: 1–35. December 1995. PMID   8724322. Archived (PDF) from the original on October 29, 2013. Retrieved July 9, 2006.
  16. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Bradshaw KD, Corton MM, Halvorson LM, Hoffman BL, Schaffer M, Schorge JO, eds. (2016). Williams Gynecology. McGraw-Hill's AccessMedicine (3rd ed.). New York, N.Y: McGraw-Hill Education LLC. ISBN   978-0-07-184909-8.
  17. ↑ Lippes J, Malik T, Tatum HJ (1976). "The postcoital copper-T". Advances in Planned Parenthood. 11 (1): 24–29. PMID   976578.
  18. ↑ Cheng L, Gülmezoglu AM, Piaggio G, Ezcurra E, Van Look PF (April 2008). Cheng L (ed.). "Interventions for emergency contraception". The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2): CD001324. doi:10.1002/14651858.cd001324.pub3. PMID   18425871.
  19. ↑ Ramanadhan S, Goldstuck N, Henderson JT, Che Y, Cleland K, Dodge LE, et al. (Cochrane Fertility Regulation Group) (February 2023). "Progestin intrauterine devices versus copper intrauterine devices for emergency contraception". The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2 (2): CD013744. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD013744.pub2. PMC   9969955 . PMID   36847591.
  20. 1 2 Cleland K, Zhu H, Goldstuck N, Cheng L, Trussell J (July 2012). "The efficacy of intrauterine devices for emergency contraception: a systematic review of 35 years of experience". Human Reproduction. 27 (7): 1994–2000. doi:10.1093/humrep/des140. PMC   3619968 . PMID   22570193.
  21. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Dean G, Schwarz EB (2011). "Intrauterine contraceptives (IUCs)". In Hatcher RA, Trussell J, Nelson AL, Cates W Jr, Kowal D, Policar MS (eds.). Contraceptive technology (20th revised ed.). New York: Ardent Media. pp. 147–191 (150). ISBN   978-1-59708-004-0. ISSN   0091-9721. OCLC   781956734.
  22. ↑ O'Brien PA, Marfleet C, et al. (Cochrane Fertility Regulation Group) (January 2005). "Frameless versus classical intrauterine device for contraception". The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (1): CD003282. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD003282.pub2. PMID   15674904.
  23. ↑ Kaneshiro B, Aeby T (August 2010). "Long-term safety, efficacy, and patient acceptability of the intrauterine Copper T-380A contraceptive device". International Journal of Women's Health. 2: 211–220. doi: 10.2147/ijwh.s6914 . PMC   2971735 . PMID   21072313.
  24. 1 2 Okusanya BO, Oduwole O, Effa EE, et al. (Cochrane Fertility Regulation Group) (July 2014). "Immediate postabortal insertion of intrauterine devices". The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2014 (7): CD001777. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD001777.pub4. PMC   7079711 . PMID   25101364.
  25. 1 2 Averbach SH, Ermias Y, Jeng G, Curtis KM, Whiteman MK, Berry-Bibee E, et al. (August 2020). "Expulsion of intrauterine devices after postpartum placement by timing of placement, delivery type, and intrauterine device type: a systematic review and meta-analysis". American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 223 (2): 177–188. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2020.02.045. PMC   7395881 . PMID   32142826.
  26. ↑ Bahamondes L, Díaz J, Marchi NM, Petta CA, Cristofoletti ML, Gomez G (November 1995). "Performance of copper intrauterine devices when inserted after an expulsion". Human Reproduction. 10 (11): 2917–2918. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a135819. PMID   8747044.
  27. ↑ Berger-Kulemann V, Einspieler H, Hachemian N, Prayer D, Trattnig S, Weber M, et al. (2013). "Magnetic field interactions of copper-containing intrauterine devices in 3.0-Tesla magnetic resonance imaging: in vivo study". Korean Journal of Radiology. 14 (3): 416–422. doi:10.3348/kjr.2013.14.3.416. PMC   3655294 . PMID   23690707.
  28. ↑ Berry-Bibee EN, Tepper NK, Jatlaoui TC, Whiteman MK, Jamieson DJ, Curtis KM (December 2016). "The safety of intrauterine devices in breastfeeding women: a systematic review". Contraception. 94 (6): 725–738. doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2016.07.006. PMC   11283814 . PMID   27421765.
  29. 1 2 Mohllajee AP, Curtis KM, Peterson HB (February 2006). "Does insertion and use of an intrauterine device increase the risk of pelvic inflammatory disease among women with sexually transmitted infection? A systematic review". Contraception. 73 (2): 145–153. doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2005.08.007. PMID   16413845. Archived from the original on February 6, 2020. Retrieved September 30, 2020.
  30. ↑ "Infection Prevention Practices for IUD Insertion and Removal". Archived from the original on January 1, 2010. By the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). Retrieved on February 14, 2010
  31. ↑ Costescu D, Chawla R, Hughes R, Teal S, Merz M (March 2022). "Discontinuation rates of intrauterine contraception due to unfavourable bleeding: a systematic review". BMC Women's Health. 22 (1): 82. doi: 10.1186/s12905-022-01657-6 . PMC   8939098 . PMID   35313863.
  32. ↑ Christelle K, Norhayati MN, Jaafar SH, et al. (Cochrane Fertility Regulation Group) (August 2022). "Interventions to prevent or treat heavy menstrual bleeding or pain associated with intrauterine-device use". The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 8 (8): CD006034. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD006034.pub3. PMC   9413853 . PMID   36017945.
  33. 1 2 Molino GO, Santos AC, Dias MM, Pereira AG, Pimenta ND, Silva PH (January 2025). "Retained versus removed copper intrauterine device during pregnancy: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis". Acta Obstetricia Et Gynecologica Scandinavica. doi:10.1111/aogs.15061. PMID   39868878.
  34. ↑ Kulier R, O'Brien PA, Helmerhorst FM, Usher-Patel M, D'Arcangues C, et al. (Cochrane Fertility Regulation Group) (October 2007). "Copper containing, framed intra-uterine devices for contraception". The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (4): CD005347. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD005347.pub3. PMID   17943851.
  35. ↑ Jatlaoui TC, Riley HE, Curtis KM (January 2017). "The safety of intrauterine devices among young women: a systematic review". Contraception. 95 (1): 17–39. doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2016.10.006. PMC   6511984 . PMID   27771475.
  36. ↑ World Health Organization (2015). Medical eligibility criteria for contraceptive use (5th ed.). Geneva: World Health Organization. hdl: 10665/181468 . ISBN   9789241549158.
  37. 1 2 "Coils". Museum of Contraception and Abortion. Retrieved 2025-02-01.
  38. ↑ Sivin I, Stern J (October 1979). "Long-acting, more effective copper T IUDs: a summary of U.S. experience, 1970-75". Studies in Family Planning. 10 (10): 263–281. doi:10.2307/1965507. JSTOR   1965507. PMID   516121.
  39. ↑ Schmidt-Hansen M, Hawkins JE, Lord J, Williams K, Lohr PA, Hasler E, et al. (February 2020). "Long-acting reversible contraception immediately after medical abortion: systematic review with meta-analyses". Human Reproduction Update. 26 (2): 141–160. doi:10.1093/humupd/dmz040. PMID   32096862.
  40. ↑ Hutten-Czapski P, Goertzen J (2008). "The occasional intrauterine contraceptive device insertion" (PDF). Canadian Journal of Rural Medicine. 13 (1): 31–35. PMID   18208650. Archived from the original (PDF) on August 14, 2016. Retrieved January 22, 2009.
  41. ↑ "Data" (PDF). www.broadwaymed.co.nz. Archived from the original (PDF) on January 17, 2020. Retrieved July 10, 2020.
  42. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 "Guidance" (PDF). www.nhstaysideadtc.scot.nhs.uk. Archived (PDF) from the original on January 10, 2021. Retrieved July 10, 2020.
  43. ↑ "Nova-T 380 IUD (Intrauterine Device)". www.mistrymedical.com. Archived from the original on March 30, 2020. Retrieved March 30, 2020.
  44. ↑ "Neo-Safe T CU 380 Mini IUD". MidMeds Ltd. Archived from the original on March 30, 2020. Retrieved March 30, 2020.
  45. 1 2 3 "Product information". Prosan (in Dutch). Archived from the original on March 30, 2020. Retrieved March 29, 2020.
  46. ↑ "How big is Paragard?". Paragard IUD. Archived from the original on March 30, 2020. Retrieved March 29, 2020.
  47. ↑ "SMB T 380A, Copper T IUD, SMB T 380A IUD, Copper T IUD Device". www.smbcorpn.com. Archived from the original on July 22, 2020. Retrieved July 21, 2020.
  48. ↑ Wu S, Hu J, Wildemeersch D (February 2000). "Performance of the frameless GyneFix and the TCu380A IUDs in a 3-year multicenter, randomized, comparative trial in parous women". Contraception. 61 (2): 91–98. doi:10.1016/s0010-7824(00)00087-1. PMID   10802273.
  49. ↑ D'Souza RE, Bounds W, Guillebaud J (April 2003). "Comparative trial of the force required for, and pain of, removing GyneFix versus Gyne-T380S following randomised insertion". The Journal of Family Planning and Reproductive Health Care. 29 (2): 29–31. doi: 10.1783/147118903101197494 . PMID   12681034.
  50. 1 2 3 Ortiz ME, Croxatto HB (June 2007). "Copper-T intrauterine device and levonorgestrel intrauterine system: biological bases of their mechanism of action". Contraception. 75 (6 Suppl): S16 –S30. doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2007.01.020. PMID   17531610. p. S28:
  51. ↑ Speroff L, Darney PD (2011). "Intrauterine contraception". A clinical guide for contraception (5th ed.). Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. pp. 239–280. ISBN   978-1-60831-610-6. p. 246:
  52. ↑ Jensen JT, Mishell Jr DR (2012). "Family planning: contraception, sterilization, and pregnancy termination". In Lentz GM, Lobo RA, Gershenson DM, Katz VL (eds.). Comprehensive gynecology. Philadelphia: Mosby Elsevier. pp. 215–272. ISBN   978-0-323-06986-1. p. 259:
  53. ↑ "Intrauterine devices and intrauterine systems". Human Reproduction Update. 14 (3): 197–208. May–June 2008. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmn003 . PMID   18400840. p. 199:
  54. ↑ Speroff L, Darney PD (2011). "Special uses of oral contraception: emergency contraception, the progestin-only minipill". A clinical guide for contraception (5th ed.). Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. pp. 153–166. ISBN   978-1-60831-610-6. p. 157:
    Emergency postcoital contraception
    Other methods
    Another method of emergency contraception is the insertion of a copper IUD, anytime during the preovulatory phase of the menstrual cycle and up to 5 days after ovulation. The failure rate (in a small number of studies) is very low, 0.1%.34,35 This method definitely prevents implantation, but it is not suitable for women who are not candidates for intrauterine contraception, e.g., multiple sexual partners or a rape victim. The use of a copper IUD for emergency contraception is expensive, but not if it is retained as an ongoing method of contraception.
  55. ↑ Trussell J, Schwarz EB (2011). "Emergency contraception". In Hatcher RA, Trussell J, Nelson AL, Cates W Jr, Kowal D, Policar MS (eds.). Contraceptive technology (20th revised ed.). New York: Ardent Media. pp. 113–145 (121). ISBN   978-1-59708-004-0. ISSN   0091-9721. OCLC   781956734. Mechanism of action
    Copper-releasing IUCs
    When used as a regular or emergency method of contraception, copper-releasing IUCs act primarily to prevent fertilization. Emergency insertion of a copper IUC is significantly more effective than the use of ECPs, reducing the risk of pregnancy following unprotected intercourse by more than 99%.2,3 This very high level of effectiveness implies that emergency insertion of a copper IUC must prevent some pregnancies after fertilization.
    Pregnancy begins with implantation according to medical authorities such as the US FDA, the National Institutes of Health79 and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG).80
  56. ↑ World Family Planning 2022 (PDF) (Report). United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. 2022. Archived (PDF) from the original on January 30, 2025. Retrieved February 1, 2025.
  57. ↑ Sonfield A (2012). "Popularity Disparity: Attitudes About the IUD in Europe and the United States". The Guttmacher Institute. Archived from the original on March 7, 2010.
  58. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Margulies L (May 1975). "History of intrauterine devices". Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine. 51 (5): 662–667. PMC   1749527 . PMID   1093589.
  59. ↑ Baldauf P, Tönnes R, Simon S, David M (November 2014). "A Report on the Hysteroscopic Removal of a Gräfenberg Ring After Almost Fifty Years in Utero". Geburtshilfe Und Frauenheilkunde. 74 (11): 1023–1025. doi:10.1055/s-0034-1383130. PMC   4245252 . PMID   25484377.
  60. ↑ "Muvs - Tenrei Ota (1900-1985)". muvs.org. Retrieved 2025-02-02.
  61. 1 2 Lynch CM. "History of the IUD". Contraception Online. Baylor College of Medicine. Archived from the original on January 27, 2006. Retrieved July 9, 2006.
  62. ↑ Kaufman J (May–Jun 1993). "The cost of IUD failure in China". Studies in Family Planning. 24 (3): 194–196. doi:10.2307/2939234. JSTOR   2939234. PMID   8351700.
  63. ↑ "Advancing long-acting reversible contraception". Population Briefs . 19 (1). April 2013.
  64. ↑ Corbett M (March 20, 2024). "A History: The IUD". Reproductive Health Access Project . Retrieved February 1, 2025.
  65. ↑ Van Kets HE (1997). Capdevila CC, Cortit LI, Creatsas G (eds.). "Importance of intrauterine contraception". Contraception Today, Proceedings of the 4th Congress of the European Society of Contraception. The Parthenon Publishing Group. pp. 112–116. Archived from the original on August 10, 2006. Retrieved July 9, 2006. (Has pictures of many IUD designs, both historic and modern.)
  66. ↑ Salem R (February 2006). "New Attention to the IUD: Expanding Women's Contraceptive Options To Meet Their Needs". Popul Rep B (7). Archived from the original on October 13, 2007.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.