Dataset Information

Levonorgestrel-Releasing Intrauterine System as a Contraceptive Method in Nulliparous Women: A Systematic Review.

ABSTRACT: The aim of this review was to summarize the available evidence about the use of levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) as a contraceptive method in nulliparous women. For this purpose, studies evaluating the efficacy, safety, bleeding pattern, satisfaction and discontinuation of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system in nulliparous women were analyzed. Only original research articles published in English between 1990-27th March 2020 were considered eligible. Reviews, book chapters, case studies, conference papers, opinions, editorials and letters were excluded. The systematic literature search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Embase and Cochrane Library databases identified 816 articles, 23 of which were analyzed. The available evidence indicates that LNG-IUS is an effective and safe contraceptive method for nulliparous women that achieves high levels of satisfaction among patients. Moreover, nulliparous women seem to experience fewer expulsions than parous ones. Bleeding pattern is acceptable for the majority of patients, and bleeding disorders mainly occur in the first months after the insertion. More in-depth, long-term prospective studies are needed in this patient group to determine risk factors for the occurrence of side effects and associated discontinuations, which should not, however, delay the wider use of the method in this group, given the number of advantages.

SUBMITTER: Zgliczynska M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7408997 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Levonorgestrel-Releasing Intrauterine System as a Contraceptive Method in Nulliparous Women: A Systematic Review.

Zgliczynska Magdalena M Kocaj Karol K Szymusik Iwona I Dutsch-Wicherek Magdalena Maria MM Ciebiera Michal M Kosinska-Kaczynska Katarzyna K

Journal of clinical medicine 20200703 7

The aim of this review was to summarize the available evidence about the use of levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) as a contraceptive method in nulliparous women. For this purpose, studies evaluating the efficacy, safety, bleeding pattern, satisfaction and discontinuation of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system in nulliparous women were analyzed. Only original research articles published in English between 1990-27th March 2020 were considered eligible. Reviews, bo ...[more]

PMID: 32635369

Similar Datasets

Project description:AimsTo compare efficacy and safety of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) with systemic medication or blank control in the treatment of dysmenorrhea.MethodsPubMed, EMBASE, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and Wanfang Data were searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LNG-IUS with systemic medication or blank control among women diagnosed with primary dysmenorrhea or secondary dysmenorrhea (adenomyosis or endometriosis) from inception to 2020.04. Der Simonian-Laird random-effect model was used to pool data.ResultsSeventy-one RCTs (6551 patients) were included. Overall bias risk was medium. Sixty-two articles enrolled patients with adenomyosis; LNG-IUS significantly reduced the visual analogue scale (VAS) score compared with the systemic medication group among adenomyosis women at 3 months (standardized mean difference (SMD) = -0.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.22 to -0.40); 6 months (SMD = -1.25, 95%CI: -1.58 to -0.92); 9 months (SMD = -1.23, 95%CI: -1.63 to -0.83); 12 months (SMD = -1.66, 95%CI: -2.14 to -1.18). No difference was found in the incidence of irregular vaginal bleeding (16 RCTs; RR = 0.91, 95%CI: 0.62-1.33, P = 0.63, I 2 = 4%) and other adverse outcomes. Sensitivity analysis regarding randomization methods was robust. Nine RCTs enrolled endometriosis women. Pooling results showed no significant difference between LNG-IUS and systemic medication treatment in terms of VAS at 6 months (SMD = -0.27, 95% CI: -0.97-0.43). Moreover, LNG-IUS was associated with higher risk of irregular vaginal bleeding (26.8% vs. 0).ConclusionsLNG-IUS was associated with a reduced severity of dysmenorrhea compared with systemic medication; it was also beneficial for better control of menstrual blood loss and fewer adverse outcomes. Owing to small sample sizes, further well-designed RCTs are warranted to confirm these findings and long-term effects of LNG-IUS in the treatment of dysmenorrhea.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier: CRD42021228343.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To assess the 5-year contraceptive efficacy and safety of a levonorgestrel (LNG) 52-mg intrauterine system (IUS) from an ongoing 10-year phase 3 contraceptive trial. METHODS:Study investigators enrolled 1,751 nulliparous and parous females aged 16-45 years and desiring contraception to receive a novel LNG 52-mg IUS at 29 centers in the United States, including reproductive health clinics, private offices, and university centers. Participants had scheduled follow-up visits four times during the first year. After year 1, study visits occurred every 6 months, with phone contact at the 3-month point between visits. We assessed the primary outcome of pregnancy rate (Pearl Index) in females aged 16-35 years at enrollment through 60 months. The safety evaluation included all females for their entire duration of participation. RESULTS:The 1,751 enrollees included 1,600 females aged 16-35 years and 151 aged 36-45 years. Successful IUS placement occurred in 1,714 (97.9%) participants. At the time of the data evaluation, 495 participants finished 5 years and 176 had entered the seventh year of IUS use. Nine pregnancies occurred, six of which were ectopic. The Pearl Indices for years 1 and 5 were 0.15 (95% CI 0.02-0.55) and 0.20 (95% CI 0.01-1.13) pregnancies per 100 women-years, respectively. The cumulative life-table pregnancy rate was 0.92% (0.46-1.82%) through 5 years. Participants aged 16-35 years at enrollment were significantly more likely to report new or worsening acne, dyspareunia, pelvic pain, and dysmenorrhea; participants aged 36-45 years at enrollment were more likely to report new or worsening weight increase. Discontinuation for adverse events occurred in 322 (18.8%) participants, most commonly related to expulsion (n=65 [3.8%]). Only 39 (2.2%) IUS users discontinued as a result of bleeding symptoms. Pelvic infection was diagnosed in 14 (0.8%) participants. CONCLUSION:This LNG 52-mg IUS is highly effective and safe over 5 years of use in U.S. females. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION:Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00995150. FUNDING SOURCE:Medicines360.

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the relative effectiveness of hysterectomy, endometrial destruction (both "first generation" hysteroscopic and "second generation" non-hysteroscopic techniques), and the levonorgestrel releasing intrauterine system (Mirena) in the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding.DesignMeta-analysis of data from individual patients, with direct and indirect comparisons made on the primary outcome measure of patients' dissatisfaction.Data sourcesData were sought from the 30 randomised controlled trials identified after a comprehensive search of the Cochrane Library, Medline, Embase, and CINAHL databases, reference lists, and contact with experts. Raw data were available from 2814 women randomised into 17 trials (seven trials including 1359 women for first v second generation endometrial destruction; six trials including 1042 women for hysterectomy v first generation endometrial destruction; one trial including 236 women for hysterectomy v Mirena; three trials including 177 women for second generation endometrial destruction v Mirena). Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Randomised controlled trials comparing hysterectomy, first and second generation endometrial destruction, and Mirena for women with heavy menstrual bleeding unresponsive to other medical treatment.ResultsAt around 12 months, more women were dissatisfied with outcome with first generation hysteroscopic techniques than with hysterectomy (13% v 5%; odds ratio 2.46, 95% confidence interval 1.54 to 3.9, P<0.001), but hospital stay (weighted mean difference 3.0 days, 2.9 to 3.1 days, P<0.001) and time to resumption of normal activities (5.2 days, 4.7 to 5.7 days, P<0.001) were longer for hysterectomy. Unsatisfactory outcomes were comparable with first and second generation techniques (odds ratio 1.2, 0.9 to 1.6, P=0.2), although second generation techniques were quicker (weighted mean difference 14.5 minutes, 13.7 to 15.3 minutes, P<0.001) and women recovered sooner (0.48 days, 0.20 to 0.75 days, P<0.001), with fewer procedural complications. Indirect comparison suggested more unsatisfactory outcomes with second generation techniques than with hysterectomy (11% v 5%; odds ratio 2.3, 1.3 to 4.2, P=0.006). Similar estimates were seen when Mirena was indirectly compared with hysterectomy (17% v 5%; odds ratio 2.2, 0.9 to 5.3, P=0.07), although this comparison lacked power because of the limited amount of data available for analysis.ConclusionsMore women are dissatisfied after endometrial destruction than after hysterectomy. Dissatisfaction rates are low after all treatments, and hysterectomy is associated with increased length of stay in hospital and a longer recovery period. Definitive evidence on effectiveness of Mirena compared with more invasive procedures is lacking.

Project description:BackgroundHeavy menstrual bleeding affects as many as one in three women and has negative physical, economic, and psychosocial impacts including activity limitations and reduced quality of life. The goal of treatment is to make menstruation manageable, and options include medical therapy or surgery such as endometrial ablation or hysterectomy. This review examined the evidence of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) as a treatment alternative for idiopathic heavy menstrual bleeding.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review of the clinical and economic evidence comparing LNG-IUS with usual medical therapy, endometrial ablation, or hysterectomy. Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane, and the Centres for Reviews and Dissemination were searched from inception to August 2015. The quality of the evidence was assessed according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group criteria. We also completed an economic evaluation to determine the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of the LNG-IUS compared with endometrial ablation and with hysterectomy. The economic evaluation was conducted from the perspective the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care.ResultsRelevant systematic reviews (n = 18) returned from the literature search were used to identify eligible randomized controlled trials, and 16 trials were included. The LNG-IUS improved quality of life and reduced menstrual blood loss better than usual medical therapy. There was no evidence of a significant difference in these outcomes compared with the improvements offered by endometrial ablation or hysterectomy. Mild hormonal side effects were the most commonly reported. The quality of the evidence varied from very low to moderate across outcomes. Results from the economic evaluation showed the LNG-IUS was less costly (incremental saving of $372 per person) and more effective providing higher quality-adjusted life years (incremental value of 0.05) compared with endometrial ablation. Similarly, the LNG-IUS costs less (incremental saving of $3,138 per person) and yields higher quality-adjusted life-years (incremental value of 0.04) compared with hysterectomy. Publicly funding LNG-IUS as an alternative to endometrial ablation and hysterectomy would result in annual cost savings of $3 million to $9 million and $0.1 million to $23 million, respectively, over the first 5 years.ConclusionsThe 52-mg LNG-IUS is an effective and cost-effective treatment option for idiopathic heavy menstrual bleeding. It improves quality of life and menstrual blood loss, and is well tolerated compared with endometrial ablation, hysterectomy, or usual medical therapies.

Dataset Information

Levonorgestrel-Releasing Intrauterine System as a Contraceptive Method in Nulliparous Women: A Systematic Review.

Publications

Levonorgestrel-Releasing Intrauterine System as a Contraceptive Method in Nulliparous Women: A Systematic Review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets