Advertisement

Real world data on Nexplanon® procedure-related events: final results from the Nexplanon Observational Risk Assessment study (NORA)

      Abstract

      Objectives

      We conducted this study to characterize the frequency of insertion-, localization- and removal-related events and their clinically significant consequences among Nexplanon® (etonogestrel radiopaque contraceptive implant) users in the United States during standard clinical practice.

      Study design

      The Nexplanon Observational Risk Assessment (NORA) study was a large, prospective cohort study conducted in the United States. A total of 428 Health Care Professionals (HCPs) who had completed the Nexplanon clinical training program recruited women who were newly prescribed Nexplanon. We collected data on insertion-, localization- and removal-related events experienced during routine clinical practice via questionnaires completed by patients and HCPs. Recruitment began in December 2011 and follow-up ended in October 2017. Data analysis characterized the frequency of procedure-related events.

      Results

      We collected data on 7364 insertion procedures. The incidence of incorrect insertion (i.e., initially unrecognized non-insertion, partial insertion or deep insertion) was 12.6 per 1000 insertions (95% CI, 10.2–15.5). Pins and needles/numbness in the arm/hand/fingers was the most common patient-reported event. We obtained data on 5159 removal procedures, of which all were successful but one (due to the location of the implant in deep muscle tissue). No implants were localized outside the arm. The most common challenge reported by HCPs during implant removal was encasement of the implant within fibrotic tissue.

      Conclusions

      Events associated with the insertion, localization and removal of the Nexplanon contraceptive implant were rare and their clinical consequences were generally not suggestive of serious injury.

      Implications

      This study is the largest prospective evaluation of events associated with insertion and removal of Nexplanon during routine clinical practice. It demonstrates that complications associated with insertion and removal of Nexplanon are rare when performed by trained clinicians.

      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 access
      One-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 Contraception
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Smith J.W.
        • Conwit R.A.
        • Blumenthal P.D.
        Ulnar nerve injury associated with removal of Norplant implants.
        Contraception. 1998; 57: 99-101
        • Brown M.
        • Britton J.
        Neuropathy associated with etonogestrel implant insertion.
        Contraception. 2012; 86: 591-593
        • Laumonerie P.
        • Blasco L.
        • Tibbo M.E.
        • Leclair O.
        • Kerezoudis P.
        • Chantalat E.
        • et al.
        Peripheral nerve injury associated with a subdermal contraceptive implant: illustrative cases and systematic review of literature.
        World Neurosurg. 2018; 111: 317-325
        • Gillies R.
        • Scougall P.
        • Nicklin S.
        Etonogestrel implants: case studies of median nerve injury following removal.
        Aust Fam Physician. 2011; 40: 799-800
        • Kang S.
        • Niak A.
        • Gada N.
        • Brinker A.
        • Jones S.C.
        Etonogestrel implant migration to the vasculature, chest wall, and distant body sites: cases from a pharmacovigilance database.
        Contraception. 2017; 96: 439-445
        • Clopper C.J.
        • Pearson E.S.
        The use of confidence or fiducial limits illustrated in the case of the binomial.
        Biometrika. 1934; 26: 404-413
        • Ismail H.
        • Mansour D.
        • Singh M.
        Migration of Implanon.
        J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care. 2006 Jul; 32: 157-159
        • Shapiro S.
        Bias in the evaluation of low-magnitude associations: an empirical perspective.
        Am J Epidemiol. 2000; 151: 939-945