Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2007 Nov 12:4:11.
doi: 10.1186/1742-4755-4-11.

A three-year longitudinal evaluation of the forearm bone density of users of etonogestrel- and levonorgestrel-releasing contraceptive implants

Affiliations

A three-year longitudinal evaluation of the forearm bone density of users of etonogestrel- and levonorgestrel-releasing contraceptive implants

Cecilia Monteiro-Dantas et al. Reprod Health. .

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate bone mineral density (BMD) at baseline and at 18 and 36 months of use of etonogestrel (ENG)-and levonorgestrel (LNG)-releasing contraceptive implants. This is a continuation of a previous study in which BMD was evaluated at baseline and at 18 months of use.

Methods: A total of 111 women, 19-43 years of age, were randomly allocated to use one of the two implants. At 36 months of follow-up, only 36 and 39 women were still using the ENG- and LNG-releasing implants, respectively. BMD was evaluated at the distal and at the ultra-distal radius of the non-dominant forearm using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry.

Results: There was no difference in the BMD of users of either implant at 18 and at 36 months. BMD was significantly lower at 18 and at 36 months at the distal radius in both groups of users compared to pre-insertion values; however, no difference was found at the ultra-distal radius.

Conclusion: Women 19-43 years of age using either one of these two contraceptive implants for 36 months had lower BMD values at the distal radius compared to pre-insertion values; however, no difference was found at the ultra-distal radius.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Curtis KM, Martins SL. Progestogen-only contraception and bone mineral density: a systematic review. Contraception. 2006;73:470–487. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2005.12.010. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Riggs BL, Melton LJ. Involutional osteoporosis. N Engl J Med. 1986;314:1676–1686. - PubMed
    1. Recker RR, Davies KM, Hinders SM, Heaney RP, Stegman MR, Kimmel DB. Bone gain in young adult women. JAMA. 1992;268:2403–2408. doi: 10.1001/jama.268.17.2403. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Gbolade B, Ellis S, Murby B, Randall S, Kirkman R. Bone density in long-term users of depot medroxyprogesterone acetate. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1998;105:790–794. - PubMed
    1. Bahamondes L, Trevisan M, Andrade L, Marchi NM, Castro S, Faundes A. The effect upon the human vaginal histology of the long-term use of the injectable contraceptive Depo-Provera. Contraception. 2000;62:23–27. doi: 10.1016/S0010-7824(00)00132-3. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources