Retained versus removed copper intrauterine device during pregnancy: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Gabriela Oliveira Gonçalves Molino, Ana Clara Felix de Farias Santos, Maírla Marina Ferreira Dias, Ana Gabriela Alves Pereira, Nicole dos Santos Pimenta, Pedro Henrique Costa Matos da Silva
{"title":"Retained versus removed copper intrauterine device during pregnancy: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis","authors":"Gabriela Oliveira Gonçalves Molino,&nbsp;Ana Clara Felix de Farias Santos,&nbsp;Maírla Marina Ferreira Dias,&nbsp;Ana Gabriela Alves Pereira,&nbsp;Nicole dos Santos Pimenta,&nbsp;Pedro Henrique Costa Matos da Silva","doi":"10.1111/aogs.15061","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>Intrauterine devices (IUDs) are highly effective contraceptives. Despite their effectiveness, pregnancies can occur during IUD use, and the management of such cases, particularly when the pregnancy is desired, remains controversial.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Material and Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate outcomes in women who unintentionally conceived while using IUDs and chose to continue their pregnancies. We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases to identify studies comparing women who removed their IUD after pregnancy discovery to those who retained it. The primary outcomes assessed were miscarriage, bleeding during pregnancy, and preterm delivery. Secondary outcomes included cesarean delivery, chorioamnionitis, congenital malformations, intrauterine growth restriction, preterm premature rupture of membranes, and stillbirth. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for the binary outcomes using random-effects models to account for variability across studies. The certainty of evidence was measured using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>From 3719 records, 4 cohorts were included. Among the 693 pregnant women analyzed, 402 had their IUD removed, while 291 retained the device. The analysis focused on copper IUDs, with most studies reporting removal during the first trimester and after ultrasound evaluation, although gaps in standardized reporting practices and removal methods were noted. Significant benefits were observed for the IUD-removed group, including reduced incidences of bleeding during gestation (OR 0.42; 95% CI 0.24 to 0.73; <i>p</i> &lt; 0.01. Moderate certainty of evidence), and miscarriage (OR 0.29; 95% CI 0.17 to 0.48; <i>p</i> &lt; 0.01. Moderate certainty of evidence). There was no significant difference in preterm delivery rates (OR 0.78; 95% CI 0.34 to 1.76; <i>p</i> = 0.55).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>This meta-analysis, based on data from cohort studies with moderate certainty of evidence, indicates that removing an IUD after pregnancy diagnosis may reduce the odds of miscarriage and bleeding during gestation. However, further high-quality research is needed to evaluate outcomes in pregnancies associated with hormonal IUDs, as well as critical factors such as gestational age at diagnosis, timing of IUD removal, and the position of the gestational sac relative to the device.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":6990,"journal":{"name":"Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica","volume":"104 5","pages":"804-814"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/aogs.15061","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/aogs.15061","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Intrauterine devices (IUDs) are highly effective contraceptives. Despite their effectiveness, pregnancies can occur during IUD use, and the management of such cases, particularly when the pregnancy is desired, remains controversial.

Material and Methods

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate outcomes in women who unintentionally conceived while using IUDs and chose to continue their pregnancies. We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases to identify studies comparing women who removed their IUD after pregnancy discovery to those who retained it. The primary outcomes assessed were miscarriage, bleeding during pregnancy, and preterm delivery. Secondary outcomes included cesarean delivery, chorioamnionitis, congenital malformations, intrauterine growth restriction, preterm premature rupture of membranes, and stillbirth. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for the binary outcomes using random-effects models to account for variability across studies. The certainty of evidence was measured using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.

Results

From 3719 records, 4 cohorts were included. Among the 693 pregnant women analyzed, 402 had their IUD removed, while 291 retained the device. The analysis focused on copper IUDs, with most studies reporting removal during the first trimester and after ultrasound evaluation, although gaps in standardized reporting practices and removal methods were noted. Significant benefits were observed for the IUD-removed group, including reduced incidences of bleeding during gestation (OR 0.42; 95% CI 0.24 to 0.73; p < 0.01. Moderate certainty of evidence), and miscarriage (OR 0.29; 95% CI 0.17 to 0.48; p < 0.01. Moderate certainty of evidence). There was no significant difference in preterm delivery rates (OR 0.78; 95% CI 0.34 to 1.76; p = 0.55).

Conclusions

This meta-analysis, based on data from cohort studies with moderate certainty of evidence, indicates that removing an IUD after pregnancy diagnosis may reduce the odds of miscarriage and bleeding during gestation. However, further high-quality research is needed to evaluate outcomes in pregnancies associated with hormonal IUDs, as well as critical factors such as gestational age at diagnosis, timing of IUD removal, and the position of the gestational sac relative to the device.

Abstract Image

妊娠期间保留与移除铜质宫内节育器:一项最新的系统综述和荟萃分析。
简介:宫内节育器是一种高效的避孕工具。尽管宫内节育器有效,但在使用期间仍可能发生妊娠,而这种情况的处理,特别是在希望怀孕的情况下,仍然存在争议。材料和方法:我们进行了一项系统回顾和荟萃分析,以评估使用宫内节育器时意外怀孕并选择继续妊娠的妇女的结局。我们检索了PubMed、Embase和Cochrane数据库,以确定在发现怀孕后取出宫内节育器的妇女与保留宫内节育器的妇女之间的比较研究。评估的主要结局是流产、妊娠期出血和早产。次要结局包括剖宫产、绒毛膜羊膜炎、先天性畸形、宫内生长受限、早产、胎膜早破和死产。使用随机效应模型计算二元结果的优势比(ORs)和95%置信区间(CIs),以解释研究间的可变性。证据的确定性采用建议分级评估、发展和评价方法进行测量。结果:从3719份记录中,纳入了4个队列。在分析的693名孕妇中,402名取出了宫内节育器,291名保留了节育器。分析的重点是铜宫内节育器,大多数研究报告在妊娠早期和超声评估后取出,尽管注意到标准化报告实践和取出方法的差距。取下宫内节育器组获益显著,包括妊娠期出血发生率降低(OR 0.42;95% CI 0.24 ~ 0.73;结论:本荟萃分析基于具有中等证据确定性的队列研究数据,表明妊娠诊断后取出宫内节育器可降低妊娠期流产和出血的几率。然而,需要进一步的高质量研究来评估与激素宫内节育器相关的妊娠结局,以及诊断时的胎龄、取出宫内节育器的时机和妊娠囊相对于节育器的位置等关键因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
4.70%
发文量
180
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Published monthly, Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica is an international journal dedicated to providing the very latest information on the results of both clinical, basic and translational research work related to all aspects of women’s health from around the globe. The journal regularly publishes commentaries, reviews, and original articles on a wide variety of topics including: gynecology, pregnancy, birth, female urology, gynecologic oncology, fertility and reproductive biology.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信