Department of Research & Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena, CA; Department of Health Systems Science, Kaiser Permanente Bernard J. Tyson School of Medicine, Pasadena, CA.
Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Kaiser Permanente West Los Angeles Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA; Department of Clinical Science, Kaiser Permanente Bernard J. Tyson School of Medicine, Pasadena, CA.
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2022 Jul;227(1):59.e1-59.e9. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2022.03.025. Epub 2022 Mar 12.
Intrauterine devices are effective instruments for contraception, and 1 levonorgestrel-releasing device is also indicated for the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding (menorrhagia).
To compare the incidence of intrauterine device expulsion and uterine perforation in women with and without a diagnosis of menorrhagia within the first 12 months before device insertion STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study conducted in 3 integrated healthcare systems (Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Southern California, and Washington) and a healthcare information exchange (Regenstrief Institute) in the United States using electronic health records. Nonpostpartum women aged ≤50 years with intrauterine device (eg, levonorgestrel or copper) insertions from 2001 to 2018 and without a delivery in the previous 12 months were studied in this analysis. Recent menorrhagia diagnosis (ie, recorded ≤12 months before insertion) was ascertained from the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth and Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification codes. The study outcomes, viz, device expulsion and device-related uterine perforation (complete or partial), were ascertained from electronic medical records and validated in the data sources. The cumulative incidence and crude incidence rates with 95% confidence intervals were estimated. Cox proportional hazards models estimated the crude and adjusted hazard ratios using propensity score overlap weighting (13-16 variables) and 95% confidence intervals.
Among 228,834 nonpostpartum women, the mean age was 33.1 years, 44.4% of them were White, and 31,600 (13.8%) had a recent menorrhagia diagnosis. Most women had a levonorgestrel-releasing device (96.4% of those with and 78.2% of those without a menorrhagia diagnosis). Women with a menorrhagia diagnosis were likely to be older, obese, and have dysmenorrhea or fibroids. Women with a menorrhagia diagnosis had a higher intrauterine device-expulsion rate (40.01 vs 10.92 per 1000 person-years) than those without, especially evident in the first few months after insertion. Women with a menorrhagia diagnosis had a higher cumulative incidence (95% confidence interval) of expulsion (7.00% [6.70-7.32] at 1 year and 12.03% [11.52-12.55] at 5 years) vs those without (1.77% [1.70-1.84] at 1 year and 3.69% [3.56-3.83] at 5 years). The risk of expulsion was increased for women with a menorrhagia diagnosis vs for those without (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.84 [95% confidence interval, 2.66-3.03]). The perforation rate was low overall (<1/1000 person-years) but higher in women with a diagnosis of menorrhagia vs in those without (0.98 vs 0.63 per 1000 person-years). The cumulative incidence (95% confidence interval) of uterine perforation was slightly higher for women with a menorrhagia diagnosis (0.09% [0.06-0.14] at 1 year and 0.39% [0.29-0.53] at 5 years) than those without it (0.07% [0.06-0.08] at 1 year and 0.28% [0.24-0.33] at 5 years). The risk of perforation was slightly increased in women with a menorrhagia diagnosis vs in those without (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.53; 95% confidence interval, 1.10-2.13).
The risk of expulsion is significantly higher in women with a recent diagnosis of menorrhagia. Patient education and counseling regarding the potential expulsion risk is recommended at insertion. The absolute risk of perforation for women with a recent diagnosis of menorrhagia is very low. The increased expulsion and perforation rates observed are likely because of causal factors of menorrhagia.
宫内节育器是有效的避孕工具,一种左炔诺孕酮释放装置也可用于治疗月经过多(经量过多)。
比较有和无近期月经过多诊断的女性在放置宫内节育器前 12 个月内宫内节育器脱落和子宫穿孔的发生率。
这是在美国 3 个综合医疗保健系统(Kaiser Permanente 北加利福尼亚、南加利福尼亚和华盛顿)和一个医疗保健信息交换(Regenstrief 研究所)中进行的回顾性队列研究,使用电子健康记录。本分析纳入了 2001 年至 2018 年期间年龄≤50 岁、无产后且在插入前 12 个月内无分娩的宫内节育器(如左炔诺孕酮或铜)插入的非产后女性。近期月经过多诊断(即在插入前≤12 个月记录)通过国际疾病分类,第九和第十修订版,临床修正代码确定。通过电子病历确定了研究结果,即器械脱落和器械相关的子宫穿孔(完全或部分),并在数据源中进行了验证。估计累积发生率和 95%置信区间的粗发生率。Cox 比例风险模型使用倾向评分重叠加权(13-16 个变量)和 95%置信区间估计了粗风险比和调整后的风险比。
在 228834 名非产后女性中,平均年龄为 33.1 岁,44.4%为白人,31600 名(13.8%)有近期月经过多诊断。大多数女性使用左炔诺孕酮释放装置(有和无月经过多诊断的女性中分别为 96.4%和 78.2%)。有月经过多诊断的女性更有可能年龄较大、肥胖、有痛经或肌瘤。有月经过多诊断的女性宫内节育器脱落率(每 1000 人年脱落 40.01 与 10.92)高于无月经过多诊断的女性,尤其是在插入后的头几个月。有月经过多诊断的女性宫内节育器脱落的累积发生率(95%置信区间)更高(1 年时为 7.00%[6.70-7.32],5 年时为 12.03%[11.52-12.55]),而无月经过多诊断的女性为 1.77%[1.70-1.84],5 年时为 3.69%[3.56-3.83]。有月经过多诊断的女性发生脱落的风险高于无月经过多诊断的女性(调整后的风险比,2.84[95%置信区间,2.66-3.03])。总体穿孔率较低(<1/1000 人年),但有月经过多诊断的女性高于无月经过多诊断的女性(0.98 与 0.63)。有月经过多诊断的女性子宫穿孔的累积发生率(95%置信区间)略高于无月经过多诊断的女性(1 年时为 0.09%[0.06-0.14],5 年时为 0.39%[0.29-0.53]),无月经过多诊断的女性为 0.07%[0.06-0.08],5 年时为 0.28%[0.24-0.33]。有月经过多诊断的女性发生穿孔的风险略高于无月经过多诊断的女性(调整后的风险比,1.53;95%置信区间,1.10-2.13)。
近期月经过多诊断的女性发生脱落的风险显著增加。建议在插入时对有近期月经过多诊断的女性进行潜在脱落风险的教育和咨询。有近期月经过多诊断的女性发生穿孔的绝对风险非常低。观察到的脱落和穿孔发生率增加可能是由于月经过多的因果因素。