Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Drug Safety 1/2011

01-01-2011 | Original Research Article

Uterine Perforation with the Levonorgestrel-Releasing Intrauterine Device

Analysis of Reports from Four National Pharmacovigilance Centres

Authors: Professor Kees van Grootheest, Bernhardt Sachs, Mira Harrison-Woolrych, Pia Caduff-Janosa, Eugène van Puijenbroek

Published in: Drug Safety | Issue 1/2011

Login to get access

Abstract

Background: Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine devices (LNG-IUD) are commonly used for contraception and other indications in many countries. National pharmacovigilance centres have been receiving reports from healthcare professionals and patients of uterine perforation associated with the use of these LNG-IUDs.
Methods: National pharmacovigilance centres in the Netherlands, New Zealand, Switzerland and Germany did a search on their adverse drug reaction databases for reports of cases of uterine perforation after insertion of a LNG-IUD received between the introduction of the LNG-IUD onto the market in the late 1990s and 15 July 2007.
The number of women affected and patient characteristics such as age, parity and breastfeeding status were examined. In addition, the method of detection of the perforation and the time until discovery of the perforation were analysed.
Results: Between the introduction of the LNG-IUD onto the market in each country and 15 July 2007, 701 cases of uterine perforation with a LNG-IUD were reported; 8.5% of the perforations were detected at the time of insertion. Abdominal pain and control/check-up visits were the most common events that lead to the detection of a perforation. Of 462 women known to be parous, 192 (42%) were breastfeeding at the time the perforation was discovered.
Conclusions: Uterine perforations can be asymptomatic and may remain undetected for a long time after IUD insertion. Abdominal pain, control/ check-up visits or changes in bleeding patterns are triggers for detection of perforation and should therefore be taken seriously.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Backman T, Benefit-risk assessment of the levonorgestrel intrauterine system in contraception. Drug Saf 2004; 27(15): 1185–204PubMedCrossRef Backman T, Benefit-risk assessment of the levonorgestrel intrauterine system in contraception. Drug Saf 2004; 27(15): 1185–204PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference French R, Van VH, Cowan F, et al. Hormonally impregnated intrauterine systems (IUSs) versus other forms of reversible contraceptives as effective methods of preventing pregnancy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2004; (3): CD001776 French R, Van VH, Cowan F, et al. Hormonally impregnated intrauterine systems (IUSs) versus other forms of reversible contraceptives as effective methods of preventing pregnancy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2004; (3): CD001776
3.
go back to reference Abou-Setta AM, Al-Inany HG, Farquhar CM. Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device (LNG-IUD) for symptomatic endometriosis following surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006; (4): CD005072 Abou-Setta AM, Al-Inany HG, Farquhar CM. Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device (LNG-IUD) for symptomatic endometriosis following surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006; (4): CD005072
4.
go back to reference Lethaby AE, Cooke I, Rees M. Progesterone or progestogen-releasing intrauterine systems for heavy menstrual bleeding. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2005; (4): CD002126 Lethaby AE, Cooke I, Rees M. Progesterone or progestogen-releasing intrauterine systems for heavy menstrual bleeding. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2005; (4): CD002126
5.
go back to reference Backman T, Rauramo I, Jaakkola K, et al. Use of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system and breast cancer. Obstet Gynecol 2005; 106(4): 813–7PubMedCrossRef Backman T, Rauramo I, Jaakkola K, et al. Use of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system and breast cancer. Obstet Gynecol 2005; 106(4): 813–7PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Boutet G. Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device (Mirena) and breast cancer: what do we learn from literature for clinical practice? Gynecol Obstet Fertil 2006; 34(11): 1015–23PubMedCrossRef Boutet G. Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device (Mirena) and breast cancer: what do we learn from literature for clinical practice? Gynecol Obstet Fertil 2006; 34(11): 1015–23PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Backman T, Rauramo I, Huhtala S, et al. Pregnancy during the use of levonorgestrel intrauterine system. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004; 190(1): 50–4PubMedCrossRef Backman T, Rauramo I, Huhtala S, et al. Pregnancy during the use of levonorgestrel intrauterine system. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004; 190(1): 50–4PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Zhou L, Harrison-Woolrych M, Coulter DM. Use of the New Zealand Intensive Medicines Monitoring Programme to study the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device (Mirena®). Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2003; 12(5): 371–7PubMedCrossRef Zhou L, Harrison-Woolrych M, Coulter DM. Use of the New Zealand Intensive Medicines Monitoring Programme to study the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device (Mirena®). Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2003; 12(5): 371–7PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Harrison-Woolrych M, Ashton J, Coulter D. Uterine perforation on intrauterine device insertion: is the incidence higher than previously reported? Contraception 2003; 67(1): 53–6PubMedCrossRef Harrison-Woolrych M, Ashton J, Coulter D. Uterine perforation on intrauterine device insertion: is the incidence higher than previously reported? Contraception 2003; 67(1): 53–6PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference de Groot MCH, van Grootheest AC. Mirena® en uterus-perforatie. Huisarts en Wetenschap 2005; 48(4): 165–6CrossRef de Groot MCH, van Grootheest AC. Mirena® en uterus-perforatie. Huisarts en Wetenschap 2005; 48(4): 165–6CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Gaffen A, Coleman G. Levonorgestre-releasing intrauterine system (Mirena®) and uterine perforation. Can Adverse React Newsl 2006; 16(1): 2 Gaffen A, Coleman G. Levonorgestre-releasing intrauterine system (Mirena®) and uterine perforation. Can Adverse React Newsl 2006; 16(1): 2
12.
go back to reference Zakin D, Stern WZ, Rosenblatt R. Complete and partial uterine perforation and embedding following insertion of intrauterine devices: I. Classification, complications, mechanism, incidence, and missing string. Obstet Gynecol Surv 1981; 36(7): 335–53PubMedCrossRef Zakin D, Stern WZ, Rosenblatt R. Complete and partial uterine perforation and embedding following insertion of intrauterine devices: I. Classification, complications, mechanism, incidence, and missing string. Obstet Gynecol Surv 1981; 36(7): 335–53PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Chen CP, Hsu TC, Wang W. Ileal penetration by a Multi-load-Cu 375 intrauterine contraceptive device: a case report with review of the literature. Contraception 1998; 58(5): 295–304PubMedCrossRef Chen CP, Hsu TC, Wang W. Ileal penetration by a Multi-load-Cu 375 intrauterine contraceptive device: a case report with review of the literature. Contraception 1998; 58(5): 295–304PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Harrison-Woolrych ML, Coulter DM. PEM in New Zealand. In: Mann RT, Andrews E, et al., editors. Pharmacovigilance. 2nd ed. Chichester: John Wiley & Sonns Ltd, 2007: 317–32 Harrison-Woolrych ML, Coulter DM. PEM in New Zealand. In: Mann RT, Andrews E, et al., editors. Pharmacovigilance. 2nd ed. Chichester: John Wiley & Sonns Ltd, 2007: 317–32
17.
go back to reference Haramburu F. Estimation of underreporting. Post-Marketing Surveill 1993; 7: 39–49 Haramburu F. Estimation of underreporting. Post-Marketing Surveill 1993; 7: 39–49
18.
go back to reference Martin RM, Kapoor KV, Wilton LV, et al. Underreporting of suspected adverse drug reactions to newly marketed (“black triangle”) drugs in general practice: observational study. BMJ 1998; 317: 119–20PubMedCrossRef Martin RM, Kapoor KV, Wilton LV, et al. Underreporting of suspected adverse drug reactions to newly marketed (“black triangle”) drugs in general practice: observational study. BMJ 1998; 317: 119–20PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Zijlmans M, van Vliet W, Schöls WA. Op zoek naar in de buikholte: laparoscopie bij een intra-abdominale levonorgestrel-houdende spiraal. Ned Tijdschr Obstet Gynaecol 2004; 116: 200–3 Zijlmans M, van Vliet W, Schöls WA. Op zoek naar in de buikholte: laparoscopie bij een intra-abdominale levonorgestrel-houdende spiraal. Ned Tijdschr Obstet Gynaecol 2004; 116: 200–3
20.
go back to reference Andersson K, Ryde-Blomqvist E, Lindell K, et al. Perforations with intrauterine devices. Report from a Swedish survey. Contraception 1998; 57(4): 251–5PubMedCrossRef Andersson K, Ryde-Blomqvist E, Lindell K, et al. Perforations with intrauterine devices. Report from a Swedish survey. Contraception 1998; 57(4): 251–5PubMedCrossRef
21.
go back to reference van Houdenhoven K, van Kaam KJ, van Grootheest AC, et al. Uterine perforation in women using a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system. Contraception 2006; 73(3): 257–60PubMedCrossRef van Houdenhoven K, van Kaam KJ, van Grootheest AC, et al. Uterine perforation in women using a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system. Contraception 2006; 73(3): 257–60PubMedCrossRef
22.
go back to reference Sivin I, Stern J. Health during prolonged use of levonorgestrel 20 μg/d and the copper TCu 380Ag intrauterine contraceptive devices: a multicenter study. Fertil Steril 1994; 61(1): 70–7PubMed Sivin I, Stern J. Health during prolonged use of levonorgestrel 20 μg/d and the copper TCu 380Ag intrauterine contraceptive devices: a multicenter study. Fertil Steril 1994; 61(1): 70–7PubMed
23.
go back to reference Heinemann K, Assmann A, Dinger JC, et al. Intrauterine devices and the risk of uterine perforations: interim results form the EURAS-IUD study [poster]. American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. 58th Annual Clinical Meeting; 2010 May 15–19; San Francisco (CA) Heinemann K, Assmann A, Dinger JC, et al. Intrauterine devices and the risk of uterine perforations: interim results form the EURAS-IUD study [poster]. American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. 58th Annual Clinical Meeting; 2010 May 15–19; San Francisco (CA)
24.
go back to reference Chi IC, Champion CB, Wilkens LR. Cervical dilatation in interval insertion of an IUD: who requires it and does it lead to a high expulsion rate? Contraception 1987; 36(4): 403–15PubMedCrossRef Chi IC, Champion CB, Wilkens LR. Cervical dilatation in interval insertion of an IUD: who requires it and does it lead to a high expulsion rate? Contraception 1987; 36(4): 403–15PubMedCrossRef
25.
go back to reference Harrison-Woolrych ML, Ashton J, Coulter DM. Insertion of the Multiload Cu375 intrauterine device: experience in over 16,000 New Zealand women. Contraception 2002; 66(6): 387–91PubMedCrossRef Harrison-Woolrych ML, Ashton J, Coulter DM. Insertion of the Multiload Cu375 intrauterine device: experience in over 16,000 New Zealand women. Contraception 2002; 66(6): 387–91PubMedCrossRef
26.
go back to reference Heartwell SF, Schlesselman S. Risk of uterine perforation among users of intrauterine devices. Obstet Gynecol 1983; 61(1): 31–6PubMed Heartwell SF, Schlesselman S. Risk of uterine perforation among users of intrauterine devices. Obstet Gynecol 1983; 61(1): 31–6PubMed
27.
go back to reference Chi IC, Potts M, Wilkens LR, et al. Performance of the copper T-380A intrauterine device in breastfeeding women. Contraception 1989; 39(6): 603–18PubMedCrossRef Chi IC, Potts M, Wilkens LR, et al. Performance of the copper T-380A intrauterine device in breastfeeding women. Contraception 1989; 39(6): 603–18PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Uterine Perforation with the Levonorgestrel-Releasing Intrauterine Device
Analysis of Reports from Four National Pharmacovigilance Centres
Authors
Professor Kees van Grootheest
Bernhardt Sachs
Mira Harrison-Woolrych
Pia Caduff-Janosa
Eugène van Puijenbroek
Publication date
01-01-2011
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
Drug Safety / Issue 1/2011
Print ISSN: 0114-5916
Electronic ISSN: 1179-1942
DOI
https://doi.org/10.2165/11585050-000000000-00000

Other articles of this Issue 1/2011

Drug Safety 1/2011 Go to the issue