Skip to main content
Log in

The non-contraceptive effects of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device

  • Published:
Advances in Contraception

Abstract

Clinical trials have consistently shown that the IUD that releases 20 μg levonorgestrel daily (LNG-IUD-20) has a contraceptive efficacy comparable to, if not surpassing, the Copper T380 and the Multiload Copper-375 IUDs.

The focus of this review is the device's non-contraceptive effects — the beneficial ones, such as reduction of menorrhagia, a therapeutic effect on dysmenorrhea, and prevention of ectopic pregnancy, as well as the deleterious ones, such as amenorrhea, spotting and irregular bleeding, hormonal side-effects, and functional ovarian cysts. Also discussed are the possibility of a preventive effect on pelvic inflammatory disease, the effects of the IUD on postpartum/lactating women, fertility return after removal and other safety issues.

In general, the LNG-IUD-20's non-contraceptive benefits are substantive, carry important medical and public health implications, and far outweigh the device's deleterious effects, which are either medically mild or transient in nature, and can usually be managed satisfactorily by counseling.

A better understanding of these effects, both beneficial and deleterious, of this hormone-releasing IUD should lead to more effective patient counseling, which, in turn, should improve user quality of life, minimize unnecessary removals, and maximize continuation of use.

Resumé

Les essais cliniques ont invariablement montré que le DIU libérant chaque jour 20 μg de lévonorgestrel (LNG-IUD-20) a une utilité contraceptive comparable, sinon supérieure, à celle des dispositifs Copper T380 et Multiload Copper-375.

Le présent article est axé non seulement sur les effets non contraceptifs du dispositif, ceux qui sont bénéfiques, tels qu'une réduction de la ménorragie, un effet thérapeutique sur la dysménorrhée, la prévention des grossesses ectopiques, mais aussi sur les effets délétères tels que l'aménorrhée, les microrragies et les pertes sanguines irrégulières, les effets hormonaux secondaires et les kystes fonctionnels ovariens. Y est examinée aussi la possibilité d'un effet préventif des maladies pelviennes inflammatories, les effets du DIU chez les femmes lors du post-partum et de la lactation, le retour à la fécondité après le retrait et d'autres aspects de sécurité.

En général, les avantages non contraceptifs du LNG-IUD-20 sont considérables, ont d'importantes incidences médicales et en matière de santé publique, et compensent très largement les effets délétères du dispositif, lesquels sont soit bénins du point de vue médical soit passagers et peuvent en général être convenablement surmontés en demandant conseil.

Une meilleure connaissance des effets, bénéfiques et délétères, de ce DIU libérant des hormones devrait permettre de mieux conseiller les patientes, ce qui devrait du même coup améliorer la qualité de la vie des utilisatrices, réduire au minimum les retraits inutiles du dispositif et maximaliser la poursuite de son utilisation.

Resumen

Los ensayos clínicos realizados señalaron sistemáticamente que el DIU que descarga 20 μg de levonorgestrel diariamente (LNG-DIU-20) tiene una eficacia anticonceptiva similar o incluso superior a la de los DIU CuT380 y Multiload Cu375.

Este examen se centra en los efectos no anticonceptivos del dispositivo, los benéficos, tales como la reducción de la menorragia, el efecto terapéutico sobre la dismenorrea y la prevención del embarazo ectópico, así como los perjudiciales, por ejemplo, la amenorrea, las pérdidas y el sangrado irregular, los efectos secundarios hormonales y los quistes ováricos funcionales. También se examina la posibilidad de un efecto preventivo de la enfermedad inflamatoria pélvica (PID), los efectos del DIU sobre mujeres de posparto/lactantes, el retorno de la fecundidad después del retiro y otras cuestiones de seguridad.

En general, los beneficios no anticonceptivos de los LNG-DIU-20 son significativos, tienen importantes repercusiones médicas y de salud pública, y compensan con creces los efectos perjudiciales del dispositivo, que son médicamente ligeros o bien de naturaleza pasajera, y pueden ser manejados satisfactoriamente, en términos generales, mediante un asesoramiento adecuado.

Una mejor comprensión de los efectos, tanto benéficos como perjudiciales, de estos DIU de descarga hormonal habrá de llevar a un mayor asesoramiento de pacientes, lo cual, a su vez, mejorará la calidad de vida de las usuarias, reducirá al mínimo los retiros innecesarios y aumentará al máximo la continuación del uso.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Chi I-C. An evaluation of the levonorgestrel-releasing IUD: its advantages and disadvantages when compared to the copper-releasing IUDs. Contraception. 1991;44:573–88.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Chi I-C. The TCu380A, MLCu375, Nova-T IUDs and the IUD daily releasing 20 μg levonorgestrel —four pillars of future IUD contraception for the nineties and beyond? Contraception. 1993;47:325–47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Anderson K, Odlind V, Rybo G. Levonorgestrel-releasing and copper-releasing (Nova-T) IUDs during five years of use: a randomized comparative study. Contraception. 1994;49:56–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Luukkainen T, Allonen H, Haukamaa M et al. Five years' experience with levonorgestrel-releasing IUDs. Contraception. 1986;33:139–48.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Hatcher RA, Trussel J, Stewart F, et al. Contraceptive technology update: sixteenth revised edition. New York: Irvington Publishers Inc, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Sivin I, Mahgoub SE, McCarthy T et al. Long-term contraception with the levonorgestrel 20 mcg/day (LNG 20) and the Copper T 380Ag intrauterine devices: A five-year randomized study. Contraception. 1990;42:361–78.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Indian Council of Medical Research, Task Force on IUDs. Randomized clinical trials with intrauterine devices (levonorgestrel intrauterine device, LNG), Cu T 380Ag, Cu T 220C, Cu T 200B. A 36-month study. Contraception. 1989;39:37–52.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Nilsson CG, Allonen H, Diaz J, Luukkainen T. Two-years experience with two levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine devices and one copper-releasing intrauterine device. A randomized comparative performance study. Fertil Steril. 1983;39:187–92.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Luukkainen T, Nilsson CG, Allonen H et al. Intrauterine release of levonorgestrel. In: Zatuchni GI, Goldsmith A, Shelton JD, Sciarra JJ, eds. Long-lasting contraceptive delivery systems (PARFR series on Fertility Regulation). Harper and Row; 1983:601–12.

  10. Luukkainen T, Allonen H, Haukamaa M et al. Effective contraception with the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device: 12-month report of a European multicenter study. Contraception. 1987;36:169–79.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Toivonen J, Luukkainen T, Allonen H. Protective effect of intrauterine release of levonorgestrel on pelvic infection: three years' comparative experience of levonorgestrel- and copper-releasing intrauterine devices. Obstet Gynecol. 1991;77:261–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Sivin I, Alvarez F, Diaz S et al. Intrauterine contraception with copper and with levonorgestrel: a randomized study of the TCu380Ag and levonorgestrel 20 mcg/day devices. Contraception. 1984;30:443–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Sivin I, Stern J. Health during prolonged use of levonorgestrel 20 μg/d and the Copper TCu 380Ag intrauterine contraceptive devices: a multicenter study. Fertil Steril. 1994;61:70–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Sivin I, Stern J, Diaz J, et al. Two years of intrauterine contraception with levonorgestrel and with copper: a randomized comparison of the TCu 380 Ag and levonorgestrel 20 mcg/day devices. Contraception. 1987;35:245–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Sivin I, Stern J, Diaz S et al. Rates and outcome of planned pregnancy after use of Norplant capsules, Norplant II rods, or levonorgestrel-releasing or copper TCu 380Ag intrauterine contraceptive devices. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1992;166:1208–13.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Sivin I, Stern J, Continho E, et al. Prolonged intrauterine contraception: a seven-year randomized study of the levonorgestrel 20 mcg/day (LNg20) and the copper T380 Ag IUDs. Contraception. 1991;44:473–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Wu SC, Gao J, Sung GY, Chen CH. A clinical observation of the TCu220C, Nova-T, and levonorgestrel-releasing IUD (in Chinese). Practical Obstet Gynecol. 1986;2:156–8.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Zhu P, Luo H, Xu R, Cheng J et al. The effect of intrauterine devices, the stainless steel ring, the copper T220, and releasing levonorgestrel, on the bleeding profile and the morphological structure of the human endometrium — a comparative study of three IUDs. Contraception. 1989;40:425–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Ji G, Wang S, Wu S et al. Comparison of the clinical performance, contraceptive efficacy and acceptability of levonorgestrel-releasing IUD and Norplant R-2 implants in China. Contraception. 1990;41:485–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Wang SL, Wu SC, Xin XM, Chen JH, Gao J. Three years' experience with levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device and Norplant-2 implants: a randomized comparative study. Adv Contracept. 1992;8:105–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Nilsson CG. Fertility after discontinuation of levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine devices. Contraception. 1982;25:273–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Anderson K, Batar I, Rybo G. Return of fertility after removal of a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device and Nova-T. Contraception. 1992;46:575–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Belhadj H, Sivin I, Diaz S et al. Recovery of fertility after use of the levonorgestrel 20 mcg/d or copper T 380Ag intrauterine device. Contraception. 1986;34:261–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Heikkila M. Puerperal insertion of a copper-releasing and a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine contraceptive device. Contraception. 1982;25:561–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Heikkila M, Luukkainen T. Duration of breast-feeding and development of children after insertion of a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine contraceptive device. Contraception. 1982;25:279–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Bounds W, Robinson G, Kubba A, Guillebaud J. Clinical experience with a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device (LNG-IUD) as a contraceptive and in the treatment of menorrhagia. Br J Fam Plann. 1993;19:193–4.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Anderson K, Rybo G. Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device in the treatment of menorrhagia. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1990;97:690–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Nilsson CG, Luukkainen T, Diaz J, Allonen H. Clinical performance of a new levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device. A randomized comparison with a Nova-T-copper device. Contraception. 1982;25:345–56.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Luukkainen T. The levonorgestrel-releasing IUD. Br J Fam Plann. 1993;19:221–4.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Nilsson G, Luukkainen T, Diaz T et al. Intrauterine contraception with levonorgestrel: a comparative randomized clinical performance study. Lancet. 1981;1:577–80.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Faundes A, Alvarez F, Diaz J. A Latin American experience with levonorgestrel IUD. Ann Med. 1993;25:149–53.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Sivin I. Dose- and age-dependent ectopic pregnancy risks of intrauterine contraception. Obstet Gynecol. 1991;78:291–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Franks AL, Beral V, Cates W Jr, Hogue CR. Contraception and ectopic pregnancy risk. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1990;163:1120–3.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Fylling P, Fagerhol M. Experience with two different medicated intrauterine devices: A comparative study of the progestasert and Nova-T. Fertil Steril. 1979;31:138–41.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Sivin I. Protective effect of intrauterine release of levonorgestrel on pelvic infection: three years' comparative experience of levonorgestrel- and copper-releasing intrauterine devices. Obstet Gynecol. 1991;77:960–1.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Tayob Y, Adams J, Jacob H et al. Ultrasound demonstration of increased frequency of functional ovarian cysts in women using progestogen-only oral contraception. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1985;92:1003–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Kurunmaki H. Contraception with levonorgestrel-releasing subdermal capsules. Norplant after pregnancy termination. Contraception. 1983;27:473–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Robinson GE, Bounds W, Kubba AA et al. Functional ovarian cysts associated with the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device. Br J Fam Plann. 1989;14:131–2.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Nilsson CG, Lahteenmaki PLA, Luukkainen T. Levonorgestrel plasma concentrations and hormone profiles after insertion and after one year of treatment with a levonorgestrel-IUD. Contraception. 1980;21:225–38.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Xiao B-L, Wang S-I, Zhu P-D, Shi S-Q. Norplant and the levonorgestrel IUD in Chinese family planning programmes. Ann Med. 1993;25:161–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Chi, I.C., Farr, G. The non-contraceptive effects of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device. Adv Contracept 10, 271–285 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01984125

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01984125

Keywords

Navigation