使用左炔诺孕酮宫内节育器治疗异常子宫出血的妇女与使用该节育器避孕的妇女在临床概况和结果上是否存在差异?一项横断面比较研究。

IF 1 Q4 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY Turkish Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology Pub Date : 2024-03-04 DOI:10.4274/tjod.galenos.2024.51460
Maryam Al Shukri, Maryam Said, Asha Nair, Mariam Mathew, Vaidyanatahn Gowri
{"title":"使用左炔诺孕酮宫内节育器治疗异常子宫出血的妇女与使用该节育器避孕的妇女在临床概况和结果上是否存在差异?一项横断面比较研究。","authors":"Maryam Al Shukri, Maryam Said, Asha Nair, Mariam Mathew, Vaidyanatahn Gowri","doi":"10.4274/tjod.galenos.2024.51460","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The most common indications for Levonorgestrel intrauterine device (LNG-IUD) are contraception and management of abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB). This study was conducted with the aim of exploring the differences in the clinical profile and outcome of women using LNG-IUD for contraception and AUB.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This was a retrospective comparative cross-sectional study of women who underwent LNG-IUD (52 mg) between 2012 and 2017. Their electronic health records were reviewed until the last documented follow-up or until December 2021.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 235 women had LNG-IUD with an age range of 21 to 62 years and a mean of (37.98 years±6.76). Of these women, 153/235 (65.1%) had it for contraception and 82/235 (34.89%) had it for AUB. The follow-up was 1-94 months with (mean ± SEM) follow-up for the AUB group of (21.48±2.31) months and for contraception group was (20.74±1.76) months (p-value of 0.80). There was a significant difference between the two groups in the age and body mass index (BMI), where women who had LNG-IUD for AUB were older (mean of 42.54±6.49 years, p-value <0.001) and had higher BMI (31.88±7.52 kg/m<sup>2</sup>, p-value =0.011). All LNG-IUDs that were indicated for contraception were inserted in an outpatient setting. However, 68.3% in the AUB, the insertion was in the operating theater in conjunction with hysteroscopy. After combining both expulsion and removal of LNG-IUD during the follow-up period, there was no significant difference between the 2 groups in the overall retention rate during the follow-up (p-value =0.998).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>this study shows that women using LNG-IUD for the management of AUB are older and have a higher BMI compared with those using it for contraception. AUB women experienced more expulsion compared with the contraception group, but there was no difference between the 2 groups in the overall survival/retention of LNG-IUD.</p>","PeriodicalId":45340,"journal":{"name":"Turkish Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology","volume":"21 1","pages":"7-14"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10920973/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Is there a difference in the clinical profile and outcome of women using levonorgestrel IUD for abnormal uterine bleeding and those using it for contraception?: A comparative cross-sectional study.\",\"authors\":\"Maryam Al Shukri, Maryam Said, Asha Nair, Mariam Mathew, Vaidyanatahn Gowri\",\"doi\":\"10.4274/tjod.galenos.2024.51460\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The most common indications for Levonorgestrel intrauterine device (LNG-IUD) are contraception and management of abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB). This study was conducted with the aim of exploring the differences in the clinical profile and outcome of women using LNG-IUD for contraception and AUB.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This was a retrospective comparative cross-sectional study of women who underwent LNG-IUD (52 mg) between 2012 and 2017. Their electronic health records were reviewed until the last documented follow-up or until December 2021.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 235 women had LNG-IUD with an age range of 21 to 62 years and a mean of (37.98 years±6.76). Of these women, 153/235 (65.1%) had it for contraception and 82/235 (34.89%) had it for AUB. The follow-up was 1-94 months with (mean ± SEM) follow-up for the AUB group of (21.48±2.31) months and for contraception group was (20.74±1.76) months (p-value of 0.80). There was a significant difference between the two groups in the age and body mass index (BMI), where women who had LNG-IUD for AUB were older (mean of 42.54±6.49 years, p-value <0.001) and had higher BMI (31.88±7.52 kg/m<sup>2</sup>, p-value =0.011). All LNG-IUDs that were indicated for contraception were inserted in an outpatient setting. However, 68.3% in the AUB, the insertion was in the operating theater in conjunction with hysteroscopy. After combining both expulsion and removal of LNG-IUD during the follow-up period, there was no significant difference between the 2 groups in the overall retention rate during the follow-up (p-value =0.998).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>this study shows that women using LNG-IUD for the management of AUB are older and have a higher BMI compared with those using it for contraception. AUB women experienced more expulsion compared with the contraception group, but there was no difference between the 2 groups in the overall survival/retention of LNG-IUD.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45340,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Turkish Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology\",\"volume\":\"21 1\",\"pages\":\"7-14\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10920973/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Turkish Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4274/tjod.galenos.2024.51460\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Turkish Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4274/tjod.galenos.2024.51460","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:左炔诺孕酮宫内节育器(LNG-IUD)最常见的适应症是避孕和治疗异常子宫出血(AUB)。本研究旨在探讨使用左炔诺孕酮宫内节育器避孕和处理异常子宫出血的妇女在临床概况和结果方面的差异:这是一项回顾性比较横断面研究,研究对象为 2012 年至 2017 年期间接受 LNG-IUD (52 毫克)治疗的女性。对她们的电子健康记录进行了审查,直至最后一次有记录的随访或直至 2021 年 12 月:共有 235 名妇女接受了 LNG-IUD 治疗,年龄在 21 岁至 62 岁之间,平均年龄为(37.98 岁±6.76)岁。其中,153/235(65.1%)名妇女为避孕而上环,82/235(34.89%)名妇女为 AUB 而上环。随访时间为 1-94 个月,AUB 组的随访时间(平均值 ± SEM)为(21.48±2.31)个月,避孕组为(20.74±1.76)个月(P 值为 0.80)。两组妇女在年龄和体重指数(BMI)方面存在明显差异,其中因 AUB 而接受 LNG-IUD 治疗的妇女年龄较大(平均为(42.54±6.49)岁,P 值为 2,P 值 =0.011)。所有用于避孕的液化天然气宫内节育器都是在门诊植入的。然而,在 AUB 中,68.3%的人是在手术室与宫腔镜检查同时进行的。结论:本研究表明,与使用 LNG-IUD 进行避孕的妇女相比,使用 LNG-IUD 治疗 AUB 的妇女年龄更大,体重指数更高。与避孕组相比,AUB 妇女经历了更多的排出,但在 LNG-IUD 的总体存活率/保留率方面,两组之间没有差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Is there a difference in the clinical profile and outcome of women using levonorgestrel IUD for abnormal uterine bleeding and those using it for contraception?: A comparative cross-sectional study.

Objective: The most common indications for Levonorgestrel intrauterine device (LNG-IUD) are contraception and management of abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB). This study was conducted with the aim of exploring the differences in the clinical profile and outcome of women using LNG-IUD for contraception and AUB.

Materials and methods: This was a retrospective comparative cross-sectional study of women who underwent LNG-IUD (52 mg) between 2012 and 2017. Their electronic health records were reviewed until the last documented follow-up or until December 2021.

Results: A total of 235 women had LNG-IUD with an age range of 21 to 62 years and a mean of (37.98 years±6.76). Of these women, 153/235 (65.1%) had it for contraception and 82/235 (34.89%) had it for AUB. The follow-up was 1-94 months with (mean ± SEM) follow-up for the AUB group of (21.48±2.31) months and for contraception group was (20.74±1.76) months (p-value of 0.80). There was a significant difference between the two groups in the age and body mass index (BMI), where women who had LNG-IUD for AUB were older (mean of 42.54±6.49 years, p-value <0.001) and had higher BMI (31.88±7.52 kg/m2, p-value =0.011). All LNG-IUDs that were indicated for contraception were inserted in an outpatient setting. However, 68.3% in the AUB, the insertion was in the operating theater in conjunction with hysteroscopy. After combining both expulsion and removal of LNG-IUD during the follow-up period, there was no significant difference between the 2 groups in the overall retention rate during the follow-up (p-value =0.998).

Conclusion: this study shows that women using LNG-IUD for the management of AUB are older and have a higher BMI compared with those using it for contraception. AUB women experienced more expulsion compared with the contraception group, but there was no difference between the 2 groups in the overall survival/retention of LNG-IUD.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
期刊最新文献
Maternal serum apelin-13 levels in early- and late-onset preeclampsia. Retrospective analysis of the indications, methods, and complications of pregnancy termination. The effect of gonadotropin gap for non-growing follicles in poor ovarian response: Might this be a new strategy? Association between serum copeptin levels and non-obese normoglycemic polycystic ovary syndrome: A case control study. Comparison of obstetric, neonatal, and surgical outcomes of emergency and planned deliveries in pregnancies complicated by placenta previa and in subgroups with and without placenta accreta spectrum.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1