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
. 2011 Nov;118(5):1014-1020.
doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182316308.

Malpositioned intrauterine contraceptive devices: risk factors, outcomes, and future pregnancies

Kari P Braaten  1 , Carol B Benson, Rie Maurer, Alisa B Goldberg
Affiliations

Malpositioned intrauterine contraceptive devices: risk factors, outcomes, and future pregnancies

Kari P Braaten et al. Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Nov.

Abstract

Objective: To assess possible risk factors, management, and outcomes for women with malpositioned intrauterine contraception devices (IUDs).

Methods: This retrospective case-control study compared 182 women with malpositioned IUDs shown by ultrasonography at a single institution from 2003 to 2008 with 182 women with properly positioned IUDs. We evaluated whether insertion at 6-9 weeks postpartum, postabortion placement, breastfeeding, type of IUD, pregnancy history, leiomyomas, suspected adenomyosis, and indication for placement were associated with malpositioning. Our study had 70-99% power to detect whether postpartum placement was associated with an odds ratio (OR) of 2-3.

Results: Malpositioned devices were noted on 10.4% of ultrasonography scans among women with IUDs having pelvic ultrasonography for any indication. Most malpositioned devices (73.1%) were noted to be in the lower uterine segment or cervix. Insertion of IUDs at 6-9 weeks postpartum was not associated with malpositioning (OR 1.46, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.81-2.63). Among other possible risk factors examined, suspected adenomyosis was associated with IUD malpositioning (OR 3.04, 95% CI 1.08-8.52), whereas prior vaginal delivery (OR 0.53 95% CI 0.32-0.87) and private insurance (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.24-0.59) were protective. Approximately two-thirds (66.5%) of malpositioned devices were removed by health care providers. There were more pregnancies within 2 years among those in the case group than those in the control group (19.2% compared with 10.5%, P=.046). All pregnancies were the result of IUD expulsion or removal, and none occurred with a malpositioned IUD known to be in situ.

Conclusion: Malpositioning of IUDs does not appear to be associated with insertion at 6-9 weeks postpartum. Women with malpositioned IUDs are more likely to become pregnant because of IUD removal without initiation of another highly effective contraceptive method.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Mosher WD, Jones J. Use of contraception in the United States: 1982–2008. Vital Health Stat 23 2010;29:1–44.
    1. Caliskan E, Ozturk N, Dilbaz BO, Dilbaz S. Analysis of risk factors associated with uterine perforation by intrauterine devices. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 2003;8:150–5.
    1. Andersson K, Ryde-Blomqvist E, Lindell K, Odlind V, Milsom I. Perforations with intrauterine devices. Report from a Swedish survey. Contraception 1998;57:251–5.
    1. Heartwell SF, Schlesselman S. Risk of uterine perforation among users of intrauterine devices. Obstet Gynecol 1983;61:31–6.
    1. Kapp N, Curtis KM. Intrauterine device insertion during the postpartum period: a systematic review. Contraception 2009;80:327–36.