A comparative study of two techniques used in immediate postplacental insertion (IPPI) of the Copper T-380A IUD in Shanghai, People's Republic of China. Postpartum IUD insertions in Manila, Philippines. Postpartum insertion of modified intrauterine devices. A randomized comparative study of the TCu380A and Cu-Safe 300 IUDs. Comparison of T Cu 200 and Progestasert IUDs. Randomised controlled trial of prophylactic antibiotics before insertion of intrauterine devices. IUD Study Group. Performance of the frameless GyneFix and the TCu380A IUDs in a 3-year multicenter, randomized, comparative trial in parous women. Contraceptive efficacy of the Copper T380A and the Multiload Cu250 IUD in three developing countries. Comparative multicentre trial of three IUDs inserted immediately following delivery of the placenta.
Chinese women in Shanghai who delivered vaginally and who chose to use an IUD for contraception received a Copper T-380A IUD inserted vaginally within 10 minutes after delivery of the placenta (i.e., immediate postplacental insertion, IPPI). Among them, 97.7% were primipara. The women were randomly divided into two groups: IUD inserted by hand and IUD via ring forceps. The follow-up rate of six months was 95.2%. Using Tietze's life table method and log rank test, the expulsion and other discontinuation rates were compared at three and six months postinsertion between these two different insertion techniques. Expulsions were the main reason for discontinuation. The six-month gross cumulative expulsion rates were 13.3 and 12.7 per 100 women in the hand-insertion group and ring forceps-insertion group, respectively. Discontinuation rates for medical removals (bleeding/pain) were 2.1 and 1.0 in these two groups, respectively. Neither of the differences was statistically significant (p > 0.05). No uterine perforation, infection or pregnancy occurred. The results suggest that these two different insertion techniques do not significantly affect discontinuation rates in vaginal IPPI using the TCu 380A, and the TCu 380A appears to be suitable for postpartum insertion in Chinese women. Other relevant issues, such as breastfeeding and IUD placement in uterine cavity, are also analyzed and discussed in this report. In comparative IUD trials conducted in the Philippines, IUDs were inserted immediately postpartum (within ten minutes postplacenta). The first study was designed to compare the IPCS-52 mg (Intrauterine Progestasert Contraceptive System) IUD with the TCu200 when inserted either by hand or with an inserter. Follow-up continued for three years because the IPCS model was designed to release progesterone for this length of time. There was one suspected pregnancy for which the IUD was removed during the study period. The expulsion rates were higher in the IPCS groups than in the TCu groups (p less than or equal to 0.05) and they were higher in the hand insertion groups than in the inserter groups (p less than or equal to 0.05). The second study was a comparison of the Lippes Loop D and a Delta Loop, modified by the addition of three biodegradable suture projections (made of Ethicon #2 chromic material) on the upper arms of the device. The purpose of this modification was to lower the expulsion rates associated with postpartum insertions. The expulsion rates for these two devices were comparable. There were no difficulties during insertion in either study, and few complaints were reported at follow-up. These two studies demonstrated that immediate postpartum IUD insertion proved a safe, effective means of postpartum contraception. The immediate postpartum insertion of standard intrauterine devices (IUDs) and those specially modified for postpartum use was evaluated in a multicenter clinical trial. The immediate postpartum insertion of IUDs was not associated with any increased risk of perforation or infection, although expulsion rates were higher than with interval insertions. The expulsion rate varied widely between centers using similar devices, suggesting that training in insertion is essential. Postpartum IUD insertions can be a practical contraceptive option for patients and providers of medical services. The Cu-Safe 300 is one of the latest additions to the array of available IUDs. It was specifically designed to decrease unwanted side-effects (e.g. bleeding, pain and expulsion) while providing simplicity of insertion, ease of removal and fair contraceptive protection. For comparison, the TCu380A was chosen. Both types were inserted at random in 600 recipients by a group of independent physicians with a long standing experience in intrauterine contraception. Life table analysis was used for comparison over a period of three years. The Cu-Safe 300 produced a slightly but not statistically significant higher pregnancy rate and more expulsions. Removals for bleeding and pain, however, were significantly less frequent. All inserting physicians agreed that insertion and removal of this new device was remarkably easy. Insertions of the T Cu 200 and the Progestasert IUDs in a total of 400 postpartum women were compared. Insertions were carried out within 10 minutes of delivery, either manually or with an inserter. There was a significant difference in the 6 and 12 month expulsion rates (P0.05) between the 2 groups, but no differences were found related to type of insertion. 12 month expulsion rates for the T Cu hand and inserter groups were 9.0 and 8.1, respectively, and 35.8 and 35.2 for the Progestasert hand and inserted groups, respectively. Overall, significantly fewer Progestasert users reported dysmenorrhea at follow-up and the specific 12 month dysmenorrhea rate was significantly lower for the Progestasert users than for the T Cu users. More women in the Progestasert groups reported intermenstrual spotting and bleeding, but specific 12 month rates of intermenstrual pain, spotting, and bleeding showed no differences between the groups. The value of antibiotic prophylaxis before insertion of an intrauterine device (IUD) remains uncertain. We undertook a triple-masked, randomised, placebo-controlled trial to find out whether such prophylaxis reduces the rate of IUD removal within 90 days.
                11 clinic sites in southern California enrolled women who requested IUD insertion and were at low risk of sexually transmitted infection according to self-reported medical history. We randomly assigned 1985 participants either 500 mg azithromycin or placebo capsules of identical appearance taken about 1 h before insertion of a Copper T 380A IUD. 118 women did not have an IUD inserted. We followed up 1833 of the remaining 1867 (98%) participants for at least 90 days after insertion.
                The rate of IUD removal for any reason other than partial expulsion was 3.8% (35/918) in the antibiotic group and 3.4% (31/915) in the placebo group (relative risk 1.1 [95% CI 0.7-1.8]). The two treatment groups sought medical attention with equal frequency (mean 38 visits per 100 women). During the 90 days after IUD insertion, only one woman from each assignment group had salpingitis, as defined by established criteria.
                Prophylaxis with azithromycin did not affect the likelihood that a woman would retain her IUD at 90 days or the frequency of postinsertion medical attention. In appropriately screened women, the risk of upper-genital-tract infection is negligible after IUD insertion, with or without the administration of prophylactic antibiotics. This study was conducted to evaluate a new and improved inserter (GyneFix) for the anchoring of the Frameless IUD in the uterine cavity. Previous studies conducted with a prototype inserter (Flexigard) did not show fully the advantages of the new anchoring concept because of the shortcomings of the Flexigard inserter and the complexity of the insertion technique. The GyneFix IUD was compared with the TCu380A IUD in six centers in China in approximately 300 women in each group. Only parous women were included in the study. The data from this 3-year, ongoing study demonstrate that the shortcomings of the inserter have been corrected, resulting in better performance and a much reduced rate of failed insertion/expulsion of the frameless and anchored device. The cumulative expulsion rate with the GyneFix IUD was 3.0 at 3 years (annual rates 2.67, 0.33, and 0.0, respectively) compared with a cumulative expulsion rate of 7.38 at 3 years with TCu380A (annual rates 4.63, 1.76, and 1.04, respectively). This difference is statistically significant. The majority of the expulsions with the anchored IUD occurred early in the study, indicating improper anchoring technique. The study also shows that both devices are highly efficacious. No pregnancies occurred with the GyneFix IUD (cumulative pregnancy rate 0.0 at 3 years) versus one pregnancy with TCu380A (cumulative pregnancy rate 0.34 at 3 years). The total use-related discontinuation rate at 3 years was significantly lower with the GyneFix IUD (8.34) than with the TCu380A IUD (14.13) and results in a higher rate of continuation with the GyneFix IUD compared to the TCu380A IUD (90.73 vs 85.25). Neither perforations nor pelvic inflammatory disease cases were encountered with either device in this study, demonstrating the safety of the anchoring system. The clinical performance of the Copper T380A (TCu380A) and the Multiload 250 (MLCu250) intrauterine devices (IUDs) were evaluated for 12 months in a group of women who had one of the two IUDs inserted. Results are from a randomized clinical trial conducted at four collaborating research sites located in three developing countries. The gross cumulative life-table pregnancy rate of the TCu380A IUD was significantly lower than the rate with the MLCu250 IUD at 12 months (0.5 and 1.2, respectively, p < 0.01). No statistically significant differences between the two study IUDs were found with regard to IUD expulsion or IUD removal due to bleeding/pain, personal reasons, medical reasons, or planned pregnancy. TCu380A IUD users were more likely to report experiencing increased dysmenorrhea (p < 0.01) or intermenstrual pelvic pain (p < 0.01) than were MLCu250 IUD users. However, few of these users discontinued use of their assigned IUD because of having experienced menstrual bleeding disturbances or intermenstrual pelvic pain. These data indicate that the TCu380A IUD may be a better option than the MLCu250 IUD for women wishing to practice highly effective long-term birth control without having to resort to hormonal methods. A multinational comparative trial of three IUDs (Copper 7, Lippes loop size D and the Postpartum T) randomly inserted immediately following delivery of the placenta was conducted in six centres. A total of 841 women entered the study. As the predetermined termination indices for expulsions were exceeded at six months the trial was prematurely closed. An excess of expulsions during the first 48 hours following insertion was observed for the Lippes loop compared to the other devices. At six months the expulsion rate for the Lippes loop was significantly higher than that for the Copper 7. In addition, the discontinuation rate for the Lippes loop at 12 months was significantly higher than that for the Copper 7. There were no significant differences in either the expulsion rates or the discontinuation rate at six or twelve months between the postpartum T and the other devices. At 12 months the pregnancy rates with all three devices was high; there were no ectopic pregnancies. Considerable between-centre differences were observed, particularly for expulsion rates. Possible reasons for this are discussed and future research lines are suggested.
Immediate post-partum insertion of IUDs appeared safe and effective, though direct comparisons with other insertion times were limited. Expulsion rates appear to be higher than with interval insertion. Advantages of immediate post-partum insertion include high motivation, assurance that the woman is not pregnant, and convenience. The popularity of immediate post-partum IUD insertion in countries as diverse as China, Mexico, and Egypt support the feasibility of this approach. Early follow up may be important in identifying spontaneous IUD expulsions.