Abstract
Abstract
Purpose
The aim of this study is to prospectively evaluate whether women with copper-containing intrauterine devices (Cu-IUD), currently listed as MR conditional, can safely undergo 3.0 Tesla (3 T) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).
Methods
73 women, age 18–54 years old, with a Cu-IUD who were undergoing MRI for any reason were included consecutively. Pre- and post-MRI standard pelvic ultrasound examinations were completed to determine the appropriate pre- and post-MRI positioning of the Cu-IUD. Displaced IUDs were defined by IUD crossbars not in the fundal portion of the endometrial cavity, a visualized tip in the mid or lower uterus, any part of the device located in the cervical canal or outside of the endometrial canal, a fractured device, or a non-visualized IUD. Additionally, a questionnaire was completed by participants to determine the level of pre- and post-MRI pelvic pain.
Results
There were zero observed displaced Cu-IUDs on post-MRI pelvic ultrasounds (p = 0/70, 95% CI 0, .043). Three participants were dropped from the study due to malpositioned IUDs on pre-MRI pelvic ultrasound. Six patients reported new or worsening pelvic pain/discomfort during or after their MRI examination.
Conclusion
Our results suggest that performing 3 T MRI using a low SAR setting does not cause displacement of Cu-IUDs, with zero out of 70 patients demonstrating IUD displacement.
Graphical Abstract
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference25 articles.
1. Paragard Intrauterine Copper Contraceptive [prescribing information]. Trumbull, CT: Copper Surgical, Inc; 1984. Revised 2/2020 .
2. Peipert, J.F., et al., Continuation and satisfaction of reversible contraception. Obstet Gynecol, 2011. 117(5): p. 1105-1113.
3. Kulier, R., et al., Copper containing, framed intra-uterine devices for contraception. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2007(4): p. CD005347.
4. de Albuquerque, C.U., et al., Continuation and satisfaction with intrauterine copper device inserted during caesarean delivery. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care, 2021. 26(6): p. 486-490.
5. Winner, B., et al., Effectiveness of long-acting reversible contraception. N Engl J Med, 2012. 366(21): p. 1998-2007.