Ease of removal of malpositioned IUDs: a retrospective cohort study
Ann C Frisse,Jay B Louik,Isha A Kachwala,Haotian Wu,Nicole Felix,Thammatat Vorawandthanachai,Karina Avila,Nerys C Benfield
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2024.110504
IF: 3.051
2024-06-07
Contraception
Abstract:OBJECTIVE To compare removal timing, techniques, and success of malpositioned IUDs to non-malpositioned IUDs. STUDY DESIGN We performed a retrospective cohort study of IUD users with ultrasound performed between July 2014 to July 2017 within one medical system. We used Fisher's Exact and Wilcoxon Rank Sum tests to compare clinical characteristics and IUD removal details between patients with malpositioned and non-malpositioned IUDs. RESULTS Of 1,759 ultrasounds reporting the presence of an IUD, 436 described IUD malposition. Of these, 150 described the IUD as embedded and 16 as partially perforated. IUDs were more likely to be removed and removed sooner for patients with malpositioned compared to non-malpositioned IUDs (281/436 vs. 545/1323, p<0.001 and median 17 days vs. 236 days from the index ultrasound, p<0.001). Most IUDs, malpositioned and non-malpositioned, were removed on first attempt (82%, 85%), by a generalist OBGYN (75%, 70%), using a ring forceps (73%, 65%). Most embedded and partially perforated IUDs were removed (68%, 69%), using a ring forceps (59%, 67%), on first attempt (84%, 91%). CONCLUSION Malpositioned IUDs were more likely to be removed and removed sooner than non-malpositioned IUDs. Most IUDs, even IUDs labeled as partially perforated or embedded, were removed by a generalist OBGYN, using ring forceps, on first attempt. Implications Ultrasound findings of IUD malposition are not associated with difficult IUD removal.
obstetrics & gynecology