Skip to main content
The BMJ logoLink to The BMJ
. 1998 May 30;316(7145):1671. doi: 10.1136/bmj.316.7145.1671

Data support extended use of levonorgestrel intrauterine systems

Diana Mansour 1,2, John Guillebaud 1,2
PMCID: PMC1113244  PMID: 9603759

Editor—The levonorgestrel intrauterine system (Mirena), a useful addition to contraceptive choice, is now approaching its third anniversary.

In the United Kingdom the product licence for the levonorgestrel intrauterine system permits its use for three years. In all other countries where the system is marketed, however, its use is approved for five years. There is good evidence to support this longer duration,1 and indeed the system seems to remain effective for as long as seven years.2 We understand that Schering Healthcare has applied for a two year extension to its current licence, backed by their new data that relates to the new polymer that has been used since 1990.

Many clinicians have asked us if they should conform strictly to the current product licence and replace each intrauterine system on the third anniversary of its insertion. We would strongly advise delaying reinsertion in this time, at least until the expected statement from the Medicines Control Agency.

It is well known that the process of insertion of all intrauterine contraceptives causes problems (short term inconvenience and discomfort followed by new bleeding and pain or expulsion) and also real risks,3,4 notably perforation and upper genital tract infection. These would be unacceptable if it emerges that reinsertions were not necessary.

Users of the levonorgestrel intrauterine system can be reassured that good data are available to support its use for five years. From 15 May, and until any statement concerning a change in the licence, continuation beyond three years is legitimate, at the woman’s choice, provided the established criteria for use by named patients are observed—that is, explaining that this is unlicensed use of a licensed product; highlighting the risks and benefits of the proposed non-intervention; obtaining and recording the woman’s verbal consent in her case notes; and keeping a separate record of the woman’s name and the nature of the unlicensed use.5

Footnotes

  Conflict of interest: The Margaret Pyke Memorial Trust is in receipt of research funds from Leiras and from Schering for three ongoing studies of Mirena, and has received research or educational grants from the previous franchisee, Pharmacia and Upjohn. DM and JG received ad hoc consultancy and lecture fees and associated expenses from these and other unrelated pharmaceutical companies.

References

  • 1.Irving S, El Mahgoub S, McCarthy T, Mishell Jr DR, Shoupe D, Alvarez F, et al. Long term contraception with the Levonorgestrel 20 mcg/day (LNg 20) and the Copper T 380 Ag intrauterine devices: a five year randomised study. Contraception. 1990;42:361–378. doi: 10.1016/0010-7824(90)90046-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Sivin I, Stern J, Coutinho E, Mattos C, El Mahgoub S, Diaz S, et al. Prolonged intrauterine contraception: a seven year randomised study of the levonorgestrel 20 mcg/day (LNg 20) and the copper T 380 Ag IUDs. Contraception. 1991;44:473–480. doi: 10.1016/0010-7824(91)90149-a. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.World Health Organisation. Mechanism of action, safety and efficacy of intrauterine devices. Report of the Who Scientific Group: Geneva: WHO; 1987. (WHO technical report series 753). [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Guillebaud J. Contraception. In: McPherson A, Waller D, editors. Women’s health. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1997. pp. 182–189. [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Guillebaud J. Contraception today. 3rd ed. London: Martin Dunitz. 1997. Use of licensed products in an unlicensed way. ; pp. 94–95. [Google Scholar]

Articles from BMJ : British Medical Journal are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES