{"title":"Contraception with levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system versus copper intrauterine device: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.","authors":"Pan Liu, Jiahao Meng, Yilin Xiong, Yumei Wu, Yifan Xiao, Shuguang Gao","doi":"10.1016/j.eclinm.2024.102926","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Globally, approximately 19.4% of women of reproductive age use intrauterine contraception, encompassing both copper intrauterine devices (Cu-IUDs) and levonorgestrel intrauterine devices (LNG-IUDs). Despite current guidelines endorsing intrauterine contraception as a primary method, there remains debate regarding device selection. Notably, the lack of data regarding reasons for discontinuation has limited previous meta-analyses. This study aims to comprehensively evaluate the potential differences between intrauterine devices using available multinational data, thereby providing a basis for global policy and healthcare services.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library for primary studies published from inception to January 13, 2024, with no language or geographic restrictions. The study was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42024496400). We included only randomized controlled trials comparing Cu-IUDs and LNG-IUDs. Data extraction was independently conducted by two reviewers, with unresolved discrepancies referred to a third senior reviewer for consultation. The primary outcome was pregnancy, with secondary outcomes encompassing continuation, reasons for discontinuation, expulsion, satisfaction, and other adverse events. Data were synthesized using a random-effects model. Risk of bias was evaluated with the Cochrane Collaboration's tool, and evidence quality was assessed using the GRADE framework.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>An analysis of 20 trials showed that compared to Cu-IUDs, LNG-IUDs were associated with lower risks of pregnancy (Risk Ratio 0.22, 95% confidence interval 0.12-0.39), ectopic pregnancy (RR 0.12, 95% CI 0.03-0.47), discontinuation due to increased bleeding (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.28-0.85), increased bleeding (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.25-0.7), heavy bleeding (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.22-0.75), and dysmenorrhea (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.34-0.48), but they carried a higher risk of discontinuation due to amenorrhea (RR 21.05, 95% CI 8.83-50.00). When comparing LNG (52 mg) IUD with copper (380 mm<sup>2</sup>) IUD, The LNG-IUD showed a lower risk of discontinuation due to increased bleeding (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.55-0.58) and dysmenorrhea (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.34-0.53), but a higher risk of discontinuation due to bleeding issues (RR 2.83, 95% CI 2.47-3.25) and amenorrhea (RR 5.92, 95% CI 2.81-12.49). There were no significant differences between the two terms of continuation, expulsion, non-medical reasons for discontinuation, satisfaction, and other adverse outcomes.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>LNG-IUDs and Cu-IUDs are both highly effective contraceptive methods. Compared to Cu-IUDs, LNG-IUDs were associated with a lower risk of pregnancy and adverse reactions. However, LNG-IUDs carry a higher risk of amenorrhea. When recommending contraceptive methods, healthcare providers should fully inform patients of these potential risks and consider patient preferences.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>The research was funded by Hunan Provincial Natural Foundation of China (2021JJ30040), the National Clinical Research Center for Geriatric Disorders, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University (2021KFJJ06), and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 81672225).</p>","PeriodicalId":11393,"journal":{"name":"EClinicalMedicine","volume":"78 ","pages":"102926"},"PeriodicalIF":10.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11602564/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EClinicalMedicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2024.102926","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Globally, approximately 19.4% of women of reproductive age use intrauterine contraception, encompassing both copper intrauterine devices (Cu-IUDs) and levonorgestrel intrauterine devices (LNG-IUDs). Despite current guidelines endorsing intrauterine contraception as a primary method, there remains debate regarding device selection. Notably, the lack of data regarding reasons for discontinuation has limited previous meta-analyses. This study aims to comprehensively evaluate the potential differences between intrauterine devices using available multinational data, thereby providing a basis for global policy and healthcare services.
Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library for primary studies published from inception to January 13, 2024, with no language or geographic restrictions. The study was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42024496400). We included only randomized controlled trials comparing Cu-IUDs and LNG-IUDs. Data extraction was independently conducted by two reviewers, with unresolved discrepancies referred to a third senior reviewer for consultation. The primary outcome was pregnancy, with secondary outcomes encompassing continuation, reasons for discontinuation, expulsion, satisfaction, and other adverse events. Data were synthesized using a random-effects model. Risk of bias was evaluated with the Cochrane Collaboration's tool, and evidence quality was assessed using the GRADE framework.
Findings: An analysis of 20 trials showed that compared to Cu-IUDs, LNG-IUDs were associated with lower risks of pregnancy (Risk Ratio 0.22, 95% confidence interval 0.12-0.39), ectopic pregnancy (RR 0.12, 95% CI 0.03-0.47), discontinuation due to increased bleeding (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.28-0.85), increased bleeding (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.25-0.7), heavy bleeding (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.22-0.75), and dysmenorrhea (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.34-0.48), but they carried a higher risk of discontinuation due to amenorrhea (RR 21.05, 95% CI 8.83-50.00). When comparing LNG (52 mg) IUD with copper (380 mm2) IUD, The LNG-IUD showed a lower risk of discontinuation due to increased bleeding (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.55-0.58) and dysmenorrhea (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.34-0.53), but a higher risk of discontinuation due to bleeding issues (RR 2.83, 95% CI 2.47-3.25) and amenorrhea (RR 5.92, 95% CI 2.81-12.49). There were no significant differences between the two terms of continuation, expulsion, non-medical reasons for discontinuation, satisfaction, and other adverse outcomes.
Interpretation: LNG-IUDs and Cu-IUDs are both highly effective contraceptive methods. Compared to Cu-IUDs, LNG-IUDs were associated with a lower risk of pregnancy and adverse reactions. However, LNG-IUDs carry a higher risk of amenorrhea. When recommending contraceptive methods, healthcare providers should fully inform patients of these potential risks and consider patient preferences.
Funding: The research was funded by Hunan Provincial Natural Foundation of China (2021JJ30040), the National Clinical Research Center for Geriatric Disorders, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University (2021KFJJ06), and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 81672225).
背景:在全球范围内,大约19.4%的育龄妇女使用宫内避孕,包括铜宫内节育器(Cu-IUDs)和左炔诺孕酮宫内节育器(LNG-IUDs)。尽管目前的指导方针支持宫内避孕作为主要方法,但关于避孕装置的选择仍然存在争议。值得注意的是,缺乏关于停药原因的数据限制了先前的荟萃分析。本研究旨在利用现有多国数据全面评估宫内节育器之间的潜在差异,从而为全球政策和医疗保健服务提供依据。方法:我们系统地检索PubMed、EMBASE、Web of Science和Cochrane Library,检索从成立到2024年1月13日发表的主要研究,没有语言和地理限制。该研究已在PROSPERO注册(CRD42024496400)。我们只纳入比较cu宫内节育器和lng宫内节育器的随机对照试验。数据提取由两位审稿人独立进行,未解决的差异提交给第三位高级审稿人进行咨询。主要结局是妊娠,次要结局包括继续、停药原因、开除、满意度和其他不良事件。数据采用随机效应模型合成。使用Cochrane协作工具评估偏倚风险,使用GRADE框架评估证据质量。发现:对20项试验的分析显示,与cu - iud相比,lng - iud的妊娠风险(风险比0.22,95%可信区间0.12-0.39)、异位妊娠(RR 0.12, 95% CI 0.03-0.47)、因出血增加而停药(RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.28-0.85)、出血增加(RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.25-0.7)、大出血(RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.22-0.75)和痛经(RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.34-0.48)较低。但因闭经而停药的风险较高(RR 21.05, 95% CI 8.83-50.00)。当比较LNG (52 mg) IUD与铜(380 mm2) IUD时,LNG-IUD因出血增加(RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.55-0.58)和痛经(RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.34-0.53)而停药的风险较低,但因出血问题(RR 2.83, 95% CI 2.47-3.25)和闭经(RR 5.92, 95% CI 2.81-12.49)而停药的风险较高。在继续、开除、非医疗原因的中止、满意度和其他不良结果这两个方面,没有显著差异。解读:lng宫内节育器和cu宫内节育器都是非常有效的避孕方法。与cu宫内节育器相比,lng宫内节育器与较低的妊娠风险和不良反应相关。然而,lng宫内节育器有较高的闭经风险。在推荐避孕方法时,医疗保健提供者应充分告知患者这些潜在的风险,并考虑患者的偏好。基金资助:湖南省自然基金项目(2021JJ30040)、中南大学湘雅医院老年疾病临床研究中心项目(2021KFJJ06)、国家自然科学基金项目(81672225)资助。
期刊介绍:
eClinicalMedicine is a gold open-access clinical journal designed to support frontline health professionals in addressing the complex and rapid health transitions affecting societies globally. The journal aims to assist practitioners in overcoming healthcare challenges across diverse communities, spanning diagnosis, treatment, prevention, and health promotion. Integrating disciplines from various specialties and life stages, it seeks to enhance health systems as fundamental institutions within societies. With a forward-thinking approach, eClinicalMedicine aims to redefine the future of healthcare.