Abstract
Objective
The object of this study is to examine factors and symptoms associated with low-lying
IUDs as defined by ultrasound.
Study Design
This is a cross-sectional sub-study of participants in the Study of Environment, Life-style,
and Fibroids (SELF). SELF participants had screening ultrasounds for fibroids at study
enrollment; those with an IUD in place are included in this sub-study. Low-lying IUDs
were identified and localized. Logistic regression was used to identify factors and
symptoms associated with low-lying IUDs.
Results
Among 168 women with IUDs at ultrasound, 28 (17%) had a low-lying IUD. Having a low-lying
IUD was associated with low education level (≤high school: aOR 3.1 95% CI 1.14–8.55)
and with increased BMI (p=.002). Women with a low-lying IUD were more likely to report
a “big problem” with dysmenorrhea (the highest option of the Likert scale) as compared
to women with a normally-positioned IUD (OR 3.2 95% CI 1.07–9.54).
Conclusion
Our study found that women with a low-lying IUD are more likely to be of lower education
and higher BMI, and to report more dysmenorrhea.
Implications
Women who are obese may benefit from additional counseling and closer follow-up after
IUD placement. Future research is warranted to investigate IUD placement and possible
IUD migration among women who are obese.
Keywords
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to ContraceptionAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Trends in long-acting reversible contraception use among U.S. women aged 15-44.NCHS Data Brief. 2015; : 1-8
- Changes in use of long-acting reversible contraceptive methods among U.S. women, 2009-2012.Obstet Gynecol. 2015; 126: 917-927
- Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device used for dysmenorrhea: five-year literature review.Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol. 2014; 41: 495-498
- Intrauterine device use among women with uterine fibroids: a systematic review.Contraception. 2010; 82: 41-55
- Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device use in female adolescents with heavy menstrual bleeding and bleeding disorders: single institution review.J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2017; 30: 479-483
- Three-dimensional ultrasound detection of abnormally located intrauterine contraceptive devices which are a source of pelvic pain and abnormal bleeding.Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2009; 34: 110-115
- Malpositioned intrauterine contraceptive devices: risk factors, outcomes, and future pregnancies.Obstet Gynecol. 2011; 118: 1014-1020
- Association of the position of the Copper T 380a as determined by the ultrasonography following its insertion in the immediate postpartum period with the subsequent complications: an observational study.J Obstet Gynaecol India. 2014; 64: 349-353
- Association of age and parity with intrauterine device expulsion.Obstet Gynecol. 2014; 124: 718-726
- Can ultrasound predict IUD expulsion after medical abortion?.Contraception. 2014; 89: 434-439
- Effects of age, parity, and device type on complications and discontinuation of intrauterine devices.Obstet Gynecol. 2014; 123: 585-592
- Immediate postabortal insertion of intrauterine devices.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010; : CD001777
- Immediate post-partum insertion of intrauterine devices.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010; : CD003036
- Menstrual characteristics and ultrasonographic uterine cavity measurements predict bleeding and pain in nulligravid women using intrauterine contraception.Hum Reprod. 2015; 30: 1580-1588
- Dimensions of the endometrial cavity and intrauterine device expulsion or removal for displacement: a nested case-control study.BJOG. 2014; 121: 997-1004
- The width of the uterine cavity is narrower in patients with an embedded intrauterine device (IUD) compared to a normally positioned IUD.J Ultrasound Med. 2010; 29: 1453-1456
- Risk factors for copper T IUD expulsion: an epidemiologic analysis.Contraception. 1992; 46: 427-433
- T-shaped IUDs accommodate in their position during the first 3 months after insertion.Contraception. 2000; 62: 165-168
- Spontaneous upward movement of lowly placed T-shaped IUDs.Contraception. 2005; 72: 430-431
- The use of vaginal ultrasound to identify copper T IUDs at high risk of expulsion.Contraception. 1996; 54: 287-289
- The value of transvaginal ultrasound to monitor the position of an intrauterine device after insertion. A technology assessment study.Hum Reprod. 2003; 18: 2323-2327
- Intrauterine device failure: relation to its location within the uterine cavity.Obstet Gynecol. 1993; 81: 112-114
- The evaluation of 318 intrauterine pregnancy cases with an intrauterine device.Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2005; 10: 266-271
- A prospective, ultrasound-based study to evaluate risk factors for uterine fibroid incidence and growth: methods and results of recruitment.J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2015; 24: 907-915
- Defining overweight &. obesity.
- Base SAS 9.3.SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC2002–2010
- Prevalence of childhood and adult obesity in the United States, 2011-2012.JAMA. 2014; 311: 806-814
- Beware hormonal IUD expulsion in obese women.Ob Gyn News. 2017;
- Intrauterine device insertion-related complications: can they be predicted?.J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care. 2003; 29: 227-231
- ACOG practice bulletin No. 121: long-acting reversible contraception: Implants and intrauterine devices.Obstet Gynecol. 2011; 118: 184-196
- U.S. medical eligibility criteria for contraceptive use, 2016.MMWR Recomm Rep. 2016; 65: 1-103
Article info
Publication history
Published online: March 14, 2018
Accepted:
February 28,
2018
Received in revised form:
February 26,
2018
Received:
October 2,
2017
Footnotes
☆Funding: This research was supported by the Intramural Research Program of the National Institute of Health, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences [grant number Z01ES0490003] and in part by funds allocated for health research by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
☆☆Conflict of interest: All authors declare no conflict of interest.
Identification
Copyright
© 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
