Skip to main content
Home
Zeitschriften
Zeitungen
Podcast
Gesundheitspolitik
Praxis
Allerlei
Jobs
Fachgebiete
Allgemeinmedizin Anästhesiologie & Intensivmedizin Apotheke Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kinder & Jugendheilkunde Neurologie & Psychiatrie Orthopädie & Unfallchirurgie Pflege Urologie Zahnmedizin
Subfächer Innere Medizin
Diabetologie Gastroenterologie Infektiologie Kardiologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Pneumologie Rheumatologie
Fortbildungen
Überblick Fortbildungen DFP-Literaturstudium-Artikel DFP-Webcast Fortbildungen DFP-Podcasts
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Journal für Gynäkologische Endokrinologie/Schweiz
Erschienen in:

01.12.2018 | Kontrazeption | Die Mädchensprechstunde

UpDate 2018: Kupferspirale, Kupferkette, Kupferperlen-Ball

verfasst von: Dr. Allessandra Tramontana

Erschienen in: Journal für Gynäkologische Endokrinologie/Schweiz | Ausgabe 4/2018

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Auszug

Das Konzept der intrauterinen Kontrazeption ist seit einem Jahrhundert immer das gleiche und trotzdem immer anders. Das Prinzip ist die lokale Verhütung in der Gebärmutter, allerdings mit immer anderen Mechanismen, in immer anderer Form und unter immer anderem Namen. 1909: Der Beginn der IUC (intrauterine contraception) als seidener Faden [1]. 1923: Die ersten Erfolge mit dem IUP (Intrauterinpessar) als Silberring [2]. 1958: Die Spirale als IUD (intrauterine device) erstmals aus Plastik. 1971: Das erste IUD umwickelt mit Kupferdraht. 1988: GyneFix®, das frameless IUD mit besserer Anpassungsfähigkeit [3]. 2014: Der IUB (Intrauterinball) mit Formgedächtnis [4]. Ob Seide, Plastik, Silber oder Gold – die Spirale ist seit 100 Jahren im Einsatz und hat sich aus Kupfer bis heute durchgesetzt. …
Vorheriger Artikel Sicherheitsaspekte des gynäkologischen Ultraschalls
Literatur
1.
Richter R (1909) Ein Mittel zur Verhütung der Konzeption. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 35:1525CrossRef
2.
Pust K (1923) Ein brauchbarer Frauenschutz. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 49:952
3.
Wildemeersch D, van der Pas H, Thiery M et al (1988) The Copper-Fix (Cu-Fix): a new concept in IUD technology. Adv Contracept 4(3):197–205PubMedCrossRef
4.
Baram I, Weinstein A, Trussell J (2014) The IUB, a newly invented IUD: a brief report. Contraception 89(2):139–141PubMedCrossRef
5.
Anteby E, Revel A, Ben-Chetrit A et al (1993) Intrauterine device failure: relation to its location within the uterine cavity. Obstet Gynecol 81(1):112–114PubMed
6.
O’Brien PA, Kulier R, Helmerhorst FM et al (2008) Copper-containing, framed intrauterine devices for contraception: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Contraception 77(5):318–327PubMedCrossRef
7.
De la Cruz D, Cruz A, Arteaga M, Castillo L, Tovalin H (2005) Blood copper levels in Mexican users of the T380A IUD. Contraception 72(2):122–125PubMedCrossRef
8.
Hostynek JJ, Maibach HI (2004) Copper hypersensitivity: dermatologic aspects. Dermatol Ther 17(4):328–333PubMedCrossRef
9.
WHO Scientific Group on the Mechanism of Action Safety and Efficacy of Intrauterine Devices & World Health Organization (1987) Mechanism of action, safety and efficacy of intrauterine devices. Report of a WHO Scientific Group. World Health Organization technical report series, Bd. 753, S 1–91
10.
Sagiroglu N (1971) Phagocytosis of spermatozoa in the uterine cavity of woman using intrauterine device. Int J Fertil 16(1):1–14PubMed
11.
Ammala M, Nyman T, Strengell L, Rutanen EM (1995) Effect of intrauterine contraceptive devices on cytokine messenger ribonucleic acid expression in the human endometrium. Fertil Steril 63(4):773–778PubMedCrossRef
12.
Tetrault AM, Richman SM, Fei X, Taylor HS (2009) Decreased endometrial HOXA10 expression associated with use of the copper intrauterine device. Fertil Steril 92(6):1820–1824PubMedCrossRef
13.
Alvarez F, Brache V, Fernandez E et al (1988) New insights on the mode of action of intrauterine contraceptive devices in women. Fertil Steril 49(5):768–773PubMedCrossRef
14.
Ortiz ME, Croxatto HB, Bardin CW (1996) Mechanisms of action of intrauterine devices. Obstet Gynecol Surv 51(12 Suppl):S42–S51PubMedCrossRef
15.
Seleem S, Hills FA, Salem HT et al (1996) Mechanism of action of the intrauterine contraceptive device: evidence for a specific biochemical deficiency in the endometrium. Hum Reprod 11(6):1220–1222PubMedCrossRef
16.
Patai K, Szilagyi G, Noszal B, Szentmariay I (2003) Local tissue effects of copper-containing intrauterine devices. Fertil Steril 80(5):1281–1283PubMedCrossRef
17.
Rivera R, Yacobson I, Grimes D (1999) The mechanism of action of hormonal contraceptives and intrauterine contraceptive devices. Am J Obstet Gynecol 181(5 Pt 1):1263–1269PubMedCrossRef
18.
Rabe T, Bruckner C (2010) Gemeinsame Stellungnahme der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Gynäkologische Endokrinologie und Fortpflanzungsmedizin in Zusammenarbeit mit dem Berufsverband der Frauenärzte
19.
Guleria K, Agarwal N, Mishra K et al (2004) Evaluation of endometrial steroid receptors and cell mitotic activity in women using copper intrauterine device: Can Cu-T prevent endometrial cancer? J Obstet Gynaecol Res 30(3):181–187PubMedCrossRef
20.
Grimes DA, Mishell DR Jr. (2008) Intrauterine contraception as an alternative to interval tubal sterilization. Contraception 77(1):6–9PubMedCrossRef
21.
Peterson HB, Xia Z, Hughes JM et al (1996) The risk of pregnancy after tubal sterilization: findings from the U.S. Collaborative review of sterilization. Am J Obstet Gynecol 174(4):1161–1168 (discussion 8–70)PubMedCrossRef
22.
Sivin I, Stern J (1994) Health during prolonged use of levonorgestrel 20 micrograms/d and the copper TCu 380Ag intrauterine contraceptive devices: a multicenter study. International Committee for Contraception Research (ICCR). Fertil Steril 61(1):70–77PubMedCrossRef
23.
United Nations Development Programme’ Correspondence, United Nations Population Fund, World Health Organization, World Bank, Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction (1997) Long-term reversible contraception. Twelve years of experience with the TCu380A and TCu220C. Contraception 56(6):341–352
24.
Farley TM, Rosenberg MJ, Rowe PJ et al (1992) Intrauterine devices and pelvic inflammatory disease: an international perspective. Lancet 339(8796):785–788PubMedCrossRef
25.
Lee NC, Rubin GL, Borucki R (1988) The intrauterine device and pelvic inflammatory disease revisited: new results from the Women’s Health Study. Obstet Gynecol 72(1):1–6PubMed
26.
Persson E, Holmberg K, Dahlgren S, Nilsson L (1983) Actinomyces israelii in the genital tract of women with and without intra-uterine contraceptive devices. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 62(6):563–568PubMedCrossRef
27.
Lippes J (1999) Pelvic actinomycosis: a review and preliminary look at prevalence. Am J Obstet Gynecol 180(2 Pt 1):265–269PubMedCrossRef
28.
Westhoff C (2007) IUDs and colonization or infection with actinomyces. Contraception 75(6 Suppl):S48–S50PubMedCrossRef
29.
Hubacher D, Reyes V, Lillo S et al (2006) Preventing copper intrauterine device removals due to side effects among first-time users: randomized trial to study the effect of prophylactic ibuprofen. Hum Reprod 21(6):1467–1472PubMedCrossRef
30.
Rivera R, Chen-Mok M, McMullen S (1999) Analysis of client characteristics that may affect early discontinuation of the TCu-380A IUD. Contraception 60(3):155–160PubMedCrossRef
31.
Lowe RF, Prata N (2013) Hemoglobin and serum ferritin levels in women using copper-releasing or levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine devices: a systematic review. Contraception 87(4):486–496PubMedCrossRef
32.
33.
34.
Wu JP, Pickle S (2014) Extended use of the intrauterine device: a literature review and recommendations for clinical practice. Contraception 89(6):495–503PubMedCrossRef
35.
Hubacher D (2007) Copper intrauterine device use by nulliparous women: review of side effects. Contraception 75(6 Suppl):S8–S11PubMedCrossRef
36.
Lyus R, Lohr P, Prager S (2010) Use of the Mirena LNG-IUS and Paragard CuT380A intrauterine devices in nulliparous women. Contraception 81(5):367–371PubMedCrossRef
37.
ACOG practice bulletin (2005) Clinical management guidelines for obstetrician-gynecologists. Number 59, January 2005. Intrauterine device. Obstet Gynecol 105(1):223–232CrossRef
38.
39.
World Health Organization, Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction, Task Force on the Safety and Efficacy of Fertility Regulating Methods (1990) The TCu380A, TCu220C, multiload 250 and Nova T IUDS at 3,5 and 7 years of use—results from three randomized multicentre trials. Contraception 42(2):141–158CrossRef
40.
Sivin I (1991) Dose- and age-dependent ectopic pregnancy risks with intrauterine contraception. Obstet Gynecol 78(2):291–298PubMed
41.
The World Health Organization’s Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction, Task Force on Intrauterine Devices for Fertility Regulation (1985) A multinational case-control study of ectopic pregnancy. Clin Reprod Fertil 3(2):131–143
42.
Marchbanks PA, Annegers JF, Coulam CB et al (1988) Risk factors for ectopic pregnancy. A population-based study. JAMA 259(12):1823–1827PubMedCrossRef
43.
Ory HW (1981) Ectopic pregnancy and intrauterine contraceptive devices: new perspectives. The Women’s Health Study. Obstet Gynecol 57(2):137–144PubMed
44.
Edelman DA, Porter CW (1987) The intrauterine device and ectopic pregnancy. Contraception 36(1):85–96PubMedCrossRef
45.
Skjeldestad FE (1997) How effectively do copper intrauterine devices prevent ectopic pregnancy? Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 76(7):684–690PubMedCrossRef
46.
Rasheed SM, Abdelmonem AM (2011) Complications among adolescents using copper intrauterine contraceptive devices. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 115(3):269–272PubMedCrossRef
47.
Shimoni N (2010) Intrauterine contraceptives: a review of uses, side effects, and candidates. Semin Reprod Med 28(2):118–125PubMedCrossRef
48.
49.
Chen CP, Hsu TC, Wang W (1998) Ileal penetration by a multiload-Cu 375 intrauterine contraceptive device. A case report with review of the literature. Contraception 58(5):295–304PubMedCrossRef
50.
Adoni A, Chetrit BA (1991) The management of intrauterine devices following uterine perforation. Contraception 43(1):77–81PubMedCrossRef
51.
Zakin D, Stern WZ, Rosenblatt R (1981) Complete and partial uterine perforation and embedding following insertion of intrauterine devices. II. Diagnostic methods, prevention, and management. Obstet Gynecol Surv 36(8):401–417PubMedCrossRef
52.
Cortessis VK, Barrett M, Brown Wade N et al (2017) Intrauterine device use and cervical cancer risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 130(6):1226–1236PubMedCrossRef
53.
54.
van Kets H, Vrijens M, Van Trappen Y, Delbarge W, van der Pas H, Temmerman M et al (1995) The frameless GyneFix intrauterine implant: a major improvement in efficacy, expulsion and tolerance. Adv Contracept 11(2):131–142PubMedCrossRef
55.
Wildemeersch D, Van Kets H, Vrijens M, Delbarge W, Van Trappen Y, Temmerman M et al (1997) Intrauterine contraception in adolescent women. The GyneFix intrauterine implant. Ann N Y Acad Sci 816:440–450PubMedCrossRef
56.
Meirik O, Rowe PJ, Peregoudov A, Piaggio G, Petzold M (2009) The frameless copper IUD (GyneFix) and the TCu380A IUD: results of an 8‑year multicenter randomized comparative trial. Contraception 80(2):133–141PubMedCrossRef
57.
58.
Van Kets H, Van der Pas H, Thiery M et al (1997) The GyneFix implant systems for interval, postabortal and postpartum contraception: a significant advance in long-term reversible contraception. International Study Group on Intrauterine Drug Delivery. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 2(1):1–13PubMedCrossRef
59.
Wildemeersch D (2007) New frameless and framed intrauterine devices and systems—an overview. Contraception 75(6 Suppl):S82–S92PubMedCrossRef
60.
61.
Eser A, Unal C, Albayrak B, Wildemeersch D (2018) Clinical experience with a novel anchored, frameless copper-releasing contraceptive device for intra-caesarean insertion. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 23(4):255–259PubMedCrossRef
62.
Baram I, Weinstein A, Seidman DS (2014) A three-dimensional way to prevent pregnancy: the IUB intra uterine ball - a newly introduced IUD in clinical trials. J Obstet Gynaecol India 64(2):152–154PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
63.
Wiebe E, Trussell J (2016) Discontinuation rates and acceptability during 1 year of using the intrauterine ball (the SCu380A). Contraception 93(4):364–366PubMedCrossRef
64.
Ocon Medical (2016) Interim first year performance of the IUB SCu300A in comparison with the IUS TCu380A intrauterine device
65.
Ocon Medical (2017) Sicherheit und Wirksamkeit des IUB™ SCu300B (MIDI) nach vorliegenden Pharmakovigilanz-Berichten
Metadaten
Titel
UpDate 2018: Kupferspirale, Kupferkette, Kupferperlen-Ball
verfasst von
Dr. Allessandra Tramontana
Publikationsdatum
01.12.2018
Verlag
Springer Vienna
Schlagwort
Kontrazeption
Erschienen in
Journal für Gynäkologische Endokrinologie/Schweiz / Ausgabe 4/2018
Print ISSN: 1995-6924
Elektronische ISSN: 2520-8500
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s41975-018-0072-y

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2018

Editorial

  • Editorial

Der Effekt von Wachstumshormon auf die menschlichen Alterungsprozesse. Teil 2

  • Originalien

Éditorial

  • Editorial

Alternative Therapien im Klimakterium

  • News-Screen Menopause

Der gynäkologische Ultraschall

Endometriumdicke in der Sonographie – ein wichtiger Parameter der endometrialen Rezeptivität?

  • Originalien
Bildnachweise