DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20191959

Clinicomicrobiological study of the removed intrauterine device

Suresh S. Kanakannavar, Ashwini R. S.

Abstract


Background: Intrauterine contraceptive devices are one of the most efficient, cost effective long acting reversible contraceptives. But the worrying clinical symptoms, misconceptions and higher rates of genital tract infection have become a hurdle in its acceptance as the first choice of contraception. The objective of this study was to study the common reasons for removal of IUCD.

Methods: An observational study was done involving 430 women who reported to the OBG Outpatient of the hospitals attached to Bangalore Medical College, over a period of 2 years, for IUCD removal. Socio-demographic details, clinical symptoms compelling IUCD removal were elicited. The removed IUCD was subjected to culture and sensitivity. Initial descriptive analysis was used and statistical tests of significance like chi-square were used to know the relation between genital infections and IUCD.  P value <0.05 was considered significant.

Results: Of the 430 women, 46.9% were between 21-25 years of age, 49.3% were primipara, and 71% used IUCD for 1-3 years. Most common reason for removal in the first 2 years was heavy menstrual bleed followed by pain abdomen. 15.3% culture reports showed growth of bacteria, with maximum cultures positive in <5 years of usage, the association was statistically significant.

Conclusions: Present study shows a lower risk of bacterial infections among IUCD users. Hence, effective counseling regarding the safety of IUCD over other spacing methods is essential to increase its acceptance.


Keywords


Genital infections, IUCD, Reasons for IUCD removal

Full Text:

PDF

References


Penney G, Brechin S, de Souza A, Bankowska U, Belfield T, Gormley M, et al. FFPRHC Guidance (January 2004). The copper intrauterine device as long-term contraception. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care. 2004;30(1):29-41.

Pál Z, Urbán E, Dósa E, Pál A, Nágy E. Biofilm formation on intrauterine devices in relation to duration of use. J Med Microbiol. 2005;54(Pt 12):1199-203.

Martins GG, Junior JE, Tomaz T, de Andrade CL, Campos W. The risk of genital infections in women using intrauterine device. DST-J bras Doenças Sex Transm. 2016; 28(2):61-3.

Richter R. Ein Mittel zur Verhütung der Konzeption (A means of preventing pregnancy). Deut Med Wochensshr. 1909; 35:1525-7.

Gräfenberg AE. An intrauterine contraceptive method. In: Sanger M, Stone MH ed. The practice of contraception: an international symposium and survey. Proceedings of the 7th International Birth Control Conferences, Zurich, September, Baltimore; Williams and Wilkins. 1930:33-47.

Ota T. A study on the birth control with an intrauterine instrument. Jpn J Obstet Gynecol. 1934;17:210-4.

Oppenheimer W. Prevention of pregnancy by the Grafenberg ring method. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1959;78:446-50.

Ishihama A. Clinical studies on intrauterine rings, especially the present state of contraception in Japan and the experience in the use of intrauterine rings. Yokohama Med Bull. 1959;10:89-93.

Merki-Feld GS, Rosselli M, Imthurn B. Comparison of two procedures for routine IUD exchange in women with positive Pap smears for actinomyces-like organisms. Contraception. 2008;77(3):177-80.

Costa Z, Ruas NM, Nascimento Sobrinho CL, Barbosa GG, Sadigursky M, Barbosa Júnior, AA. Actinomyces-like organisms in the cervical Papanicolaou-stainedsmears of intrauterine device (IUD) users. R Ci Med Biol. 2004; 3(2):159-64.

Lucas RP, Ballesteros AS, Corrales GM, Castillo EB, Vicente PP, Salvador PC. Frecuencia de colonización por actinomyces en portadoras assintomáticas de dispositivos intrauterinos. Rev Iberoam Fertil. 2002;19(5):357-61.

Simsek A, Perek A, Cakcak IE, Durgun AV. Pelvic actinomycosis presenting as a malignant pelvic mass: a case report. J Med Case Rep. 2011;5:40.

Silva FC, Boer CG, Irie MM, Yoshida CS, Svidzinski TI, Consolaro ME. Avaliação da influência do uso de métodos contraceptivos sobre os resultados dos esfregaços de Papanicolaou. Acta Sci Health Sci. 2006;28(1):65-70.

Jacques M, Olson MMD, Costerton W. Microbial colonization of tailed and tailless intrauterine contraceptive devices: Influence of the mode of insertion in the rabbit. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1986;154(1986):648-55.

Pasquale S. Clinical experience with today’s IUDs” Obstet Gynecol Survey. 1996;51(12):s25-9.

Kessel E. Pelvic inflammatory disease with intrauterine device use: a reassessment” Fertility and Sterility. 1986;51(1):1-9.

Senanayake P, Kramer D. Contraception and the etiology of pelvic inflammatory disease: New perspectives. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1980;1:38-852.

Baron E, Peterson L, Finagled S, Diagnostic Microbiology, 9th Ed. Mosby, Chow A, Smith R, Bartlett K, Goldring A, Morrison B. Vaginal Colonization with Escherichia Coli in healthy women. Am J Obst Gynecol. 1986;154:120-6.

Ghazal S, Musmar M, AL-Tel M. Epidimiology of aerobic bacterial infections among IUD (Intrauterine Device) users in the Northern West Bank. An-Najah Univ J Res. 2004;18(1):13-24.

Fiorino AS. Intrauterine contraceptive device-associated actino-mycotic abscess and actinomyces detection on cervical smear. Obstet Gynecol. 1996;87:142-9.

Vraniå E, Deliå T, Intrauterine devices - Past, present and future perspectives, Farm Vestn. 2006;57.

Wang D, Altmann DR. Socio-demographic determinants of intrauterine device use and failure in China. Human Reproduction. 2002;17(5):1226-32.

Kochar M. Etiology of pelvic infections treated by the gynecologic service of the Kasturba Hospital, Delhi, India. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1980;138:872-4.

Sparks R, Purrier B, Watt P, Elsten M. Bacteriological colonization of uterine cavity: role of tailed intrauterine contraceptives device. Br Med J. 1981;282:1189-91.

Marrie T, Costerton J. A scanning and transmission electron microscopic study of the surface of intrauterine contraceptive devices. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1983;146:384-6.

Hawkes S, Morison L, Foster S, Gausia K, Chakraborty J, Weeling R, et al. Reproductive-tract infection in law-prevalence situation: assessment of syndromic management in Matlab, Bangladesh. Lancet. 1999;354(20):1776-81.

Hill J. The microbiology of bacterial vaginosis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1993;169:450-4.

Schwebke J. Diagnostic method for bacterial vaginosis. Int J Obstet Gynecol. 1999;67:s21-s23.