Intra Uterine Device Insertion in Nulliparous Women

Contraception Clinical Trial

Official title:

IUD Insertion in Nulliparous Women: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Misoprostol for Cervical Priming

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Terminated

Administrative data

• NCT number: NCT01422226
• Other study ID #: 10-1060
• Status: Terminated
• Phase: N/A
• First received: August 22, 2011
• Last updated: February 11, 2015
• Start date: July 2011
• Est. completion date: August 2012

Study information

• Verified date: February 2015
• Source: University of Colorado, Denver
• Contact: n/a
• Is FDA regulated: No
• Health authority: United States: Food and Drug Administration
• Study type: Interventional

Clinical Trial Summary

Over the last several years, more and more women are choosing intrauterine contraception (IUDs) to meet their birth control needs. The effectiveness of IUDs is very similar to tubal sterilization, with an overall unintended pregnancy rate of less than 1% in the first year, and lower failure rates in subsequent years. Intrauterine contraception has many attributes besides its effectiveness; it is easily reversible, has a low side-effect profile, and provides a long-term solution for contraception (10 years for the copper T380 and 5 years for the levonorgestrel IUD). In addition, using an IUD for birth control requires little on-going effort by the woman to be effective and offers immediate return to fertility with its removal.

The biggest increase in users is among nulliparous women (women who have not had children), due to increased awareness of the safety of modern IUDs in this population, and the many benefits of the method. In fact, The copper IUD (Paragard) is now FDA approved for use in nulliparous women, and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists supports the use of both copper and levonorgestrel IUDs in nulliparous women. The cervix of a nulliparous woman has a smaller diameter which can lead to more difficult and uncomfortable IUD insertions. Many providers avoid offering IUDs to nulliparas because of fears that the procedure will be more difficult, and may require cervical dilation, placement of a paracervical nerve block, or placement under ultrasound guidance, none of which are standard for parous women. The medication misoprostol is a prostaglandin E1 analog. Because of misoprostol's known ability to cause cervical dilation, some family planning providers give their nulliparous patients a dose of this drug prior to IUD insertion. Misoprostol is commonly used to dilate the cervix for similar procedures as in first trimester abortions, hysteroscopy and endometrial biopsies. Its efficacy in cervical priming for IUD insertion is unknown, and some concern exists that uterine contractions caused by the drug may lead to device expulsion or displacement.

In this study, the investigators propose to ask nulliparous women who have undergone contraceptive counseling and decided to use an IUD for birth control to be randomized to the use of misoprostol or placebo prior to their scheduled IUD placement.

Description:

Hypothesis: The prostaglandin E1 analog misoprostol will ease insertion of intrauterine contraceptive devices in nulliparous women.

Specific Aim 1: To evaluate the ability to place an IUD in the standard fashion, without ancillary measures, in nulliparous women who have received misoprostol versus placebo Specific Aim 2: To evaluate in nulliparous women who have chosen to receive an IUD whether pre-procedure misoprostol eases pain, compared to placebo Specific Aim 3: To evaluate whether misoprostol reduces the rate of complications of IUD placement, compared to placebo Study drug (misoprostol) is being obtained from the University of Utah Health Sciences Center, which is the main study site. The University of Utah Health Sciences Center has obtained an Investigational New Drug (IND) exemption from the FDA in order to use misoprostol for this use in this study. This study is part of a prospective meta-analysis. Deidentified data will be provided to the other sites in a password protected spreadsheet and sent via encrypted, secure email. No identifiable data will be shared with other sites or via the internet. We did not complete attachment G, use of the internet, because this research is not being done via the internet, and no identifiable data will be accessible via the internet or shared with other sites involved in the study. Only deidentified data will be made available to the other sites involved in the prospective meta-analysis.

Recruitment information / eligibility

• Status: Terminated
• Enrollment: 3
• Est. completion date: August 2012
• Est. primary completion date: February 2012
• Accepts healthy volunteers: Accepts Healthy Volunteers
• Gender: Female
• Age group: 18 Years to 45 Years

Eligibility

Inclusion Criteria:

• Desires IUD placement

• 18 years old or older

• negative pregnancy test

• no prior pregnancies beyond 14 6/7 weeks

• no pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) in last 3 months

• no current cervicitis

• no contraindications to IUD insertion (see exclusion criteria below)

• willing to follow-up in 6-8 weeks for a standard IUD follow-up visit

• Determined by her clinician to be an appropriate candidate for an IUD.

Exclusion Criteria:

• Active cervical infection

• current pregnancy

• prior pregnancy beyond 15 weeks' gestation

• uterine anomaly

• fibroid uterus

• copper allergy/Wilson's disease (for Paragard)

• undiagnosed abnormal uterine bleeding

• cervical or uterine cancer

• allergy to misoprostol (study drug)

Study Design

Allocation: Randomized, Endpoint Classification: Safety/Efficacy Study, Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment, Masking: Double Blind (Subject, Caregiver, Investigator, Outcomes Assessor), Primary Purpose: Treatment

Related Conditions & MeSH terms

• Contraception

Intervention

Drug:
• Misoprostol
Experimental: 400 mcg taken sublingually 2 hours prior to IUD insertion

Other:
• Placebo
Pill identical to study drug in appearance, taste, smell. Taken sublingually 2 hours prior to IUD insertion

Locations

Country	Name	City	State
United States	University of Colorado Hopspital, The Children's Hospital	Aurora	Colorado

Sponsors (1)

Lead Sponsor	Collaborator
University of Colorado, Denver

Country where clinical trial is conducted

United States, 

References & Publications (9)

ACOG Committee on Practice Bulletins-Gynecology. ACOG practice bulletin. Clinical management guidelines for obstetrician-gynecologists. Number 59, January 2005. Intrauterine device. Obstet Gynecol. 2005 Jan;105(1):223-32. — View Citation

Allen RH, Goldberg AB; Board of Society of Family Planning. Cervical dilation before first-trimester surgical abortion (<14 weeks' gestation). SFP Guideline 20071. Contraception. 2007 Aug;76(2):139-56. Epub 2007 Jul 10. — View Citation

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 392, December 2007. Intrauterine device and adolescents. Obstet Gynecol. 2007 Dec;110(6):1493-5. — View Citation

Carbonell JL, Velazco A, Rodriguez Y, Tanda R, Sánchez C, Barambio S, Valera L, Chami S, Valero F, Aragón S, Marí J. Oral versus vaginal misoprostol for cervical priming in first-trimester abortion: a randomized trial. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2001 Sep;6(3):134-40. — View Citation

Crane JM, Healey S. Use of misoprostol before hysteroscopy: a systematic review. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2006 May;28(5):373-9. Review. — View Citation

Ghersi D. Prospective Meta-Analysis Methods Group. The Cochrane Collaboration 2002 [cited July 2, 2008]; Available from: http://www.cochrane.org/docs/pma.htm

Sääv I, Aronsson A, Marions L, Stephansson O, Gemzell-Danielsson K. Cervical priming with sublingual misoprostol prior to insertion of an intrauterine device in nulliparous women: a randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod. 2007 Oct;22(10):2647-52. Epub 2007 Jul 25. — View Citation

Tang OS, Ho PC. The pharmacokinetics and different regimens of misoprostol in early first-trimester medical abortion. Contraception. 2006 Jul;74(1):26-30. Epub 2006 Apr 27. Review. — View Citation

Trussell J. Contraceptive failure in the United States. Contraception. 2004 Aug;70(2):89-96. Review. — View Citation

Outcome

Type	Measure	Description	Time frame	Safety issue
Primary	Ease of IUD Insertion (Use of Ancillary Measures)	The primary outcome is the proportion in each group able to have the IUD inserted in a standard fashion without the ancillary measures of mechanical dilation of the cervix, placement of paracervical nerve block, or using abdominal ultrasound for guidance. The null hypothesis for the primary outcome is that misoprostol does not influence difficulty of insertion.	12 months	No