Might 13, 2022
1 min learn
Frisse A, et al. Summary 38. Introduced at: ACOG Annual Medical & Scientific Assembly; Might 6-8, 2022; San Diego.
Disclosures: The authors report no related monetary disclosures.
SAN DIEGO — Sufferers with a malpositioned IUD had the next danger for being pregnant inside 12 months of ultrasound IUD ascertainment in contrast with sufferers with correctly positioned IUDs, based on information offered right here.
Nevertheless, the elevated danger was not attributable to greater charges of being pregnant with an IUD in place, researchers mentioned. Quite, it was associated to the low IUD utilization charge amongst sufferers with malpositioned IUDs.
“One speculation was perhaps [with] the malpositioned IUDs, persons are extra more likely to get pregnant as a result of they don’t work as effectively as a result of they’re not in the correct spot, however from the info that we have now, it appears to be extra as a result of individuals aren’t utilizing their IUDs afterward,” Ann Frisse, MD, a fellow in advanced household planning at Icahn Faculty of Medication at Mount Sinai in New York Metropolis, advised Healio.
Frisse and colleagues retrospectively examined the incidence of being pregnant amongst 1,759 IUD customers inside 12 months of an ultrasound carried out between July 2014 and July 2017 inside a big, city tutorial medical system.
Of 436 (25%) malpositioned IUDs, 150 (34%) had been embedded and 16 (4%) had been perforated.
Total, sufferers with malpositioned IUDs had been extra more likely to expertise being pregnant inside 12 months in contrast with these with correctly positioned IUDs (10% vs. 5%; P = .002). Nevertheless, there have been no statistically vital variations between malpositioned and correctly positioned IUDs for being pregnant charges with IUD in situ, after elimination or after expulsion.
Evaluation additionally revealed that IUD use was considerably decrease amongst sufferers with malpositioned IUDs in contrast with these with correctly positioned IUDs at 3 months (51.5% vs. 82.9%), 6 months (46% vs. 77.8%) and 12 months (40.2% vs. 70.2%).
“A limitation to [our findings] — past it being a retrospective chart assessment, which comes with its personal limitations — is the definition of IUD malposition,” Frisse mentioned. “There is no such thing as a standardized definition for what makes an IUD malpositioned … We needed to outline IUD malposition based mostly off of regardless of the radiologist or gynecologist who learn the ultrasound report determined to name it.”
Along with creating standardized terminology for IUD malposition, Frisse urged future research study danger elements for IUD malposition to enhance contraception counseling.