Literatur
Richter R (1909) Ein Mittel zur Verhütung der Konzeption. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 35:1525
Pust K (1923) Ein brauchbarer Frauenschutz. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 49:952
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):197–205
Baram I, Weinstein A, Trussell J (2014) The IUB, a newly invented IUD: a brief report. Contraception 89(2):139–141
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):112–114
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):318–327
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):122–125
Hostynek JJ, Maibach HI (2004) Copper hypersensitivity: dermatologic aspects. Dermatol Ther 17(4):328–333
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
Sagiroglu N (1971) Phagocytosis of spermatozoa in the uterine cavity of woman using intrauterine device. Int J Fertil 16(1):1–14
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):773–778
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):1820–1824
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):768–773
Ortiz ME, Croxatto HB, Bardin CW (1996) Mechanisms of action of intrauterine devices. Obstet Gynecol Surv 51(12 Suppl):S42–S51
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):1220–1222
Patai K, Szilagyi G, Noszal B, Szentmariay I (2003) Local tissue effects of copper-containing intrauterine devices. Fertil Steril 80(5):1281–1283
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):1263–1269
Rabe T, Bruckner C (2010) Gemeinsame Stellungnahme der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Gynäkologische Endokrinologie und Fortpflanzungsmedizin in Zusammenarbeit mit dem Berufsverband der Frauenärzte
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):181–187
Grimes DA, Mishell DR Jr. (2008) Intrauterine contraception as an alternative to interval tubal sterilization. Contraception 77(1):6–9
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)
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):70–77
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
Farley TM, Rosenberg MJ, Rowe PJ et al (1992) Intrauterine devices and pelvic inflammatory disease: an international perspective. Lancet 339(8796):785–788
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):1–6
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):563–568
Lippes J (1999) Pelvic actinomycosis: a review and preliminary look at prevalence. Am J Obstet Gynecol 180(2 Pt 1):265–269
Westhoff C (2007) IUDs and colonization or infection with actinomyces. Contraception 75(6 Suppl):S48–S50
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):1467–1472
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):155–160
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):486–496
Hubacher D, Chen PL, Park S (2009) Side effects from the copper IUD: do they decrease over time? Contraception 79(5):356–362
Arrowsmith ME, Aicken CR, Saxena S, Majeed A (2012) Strategies for improving the acceptability and acceptance of the copper intrauterine device. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd008896.pub2
Wu JP, Pickle S (2014) Extended use of the intrauterine device: a literature review and recommendations for clinical practice. Contraception 89(6):495–503
Hubacher D (2007) Copper intrauterine device use by nulliparous women: review of side effects. Contraception 75(6 Suppl):S8–S11
Lyus R, Lohr P, Prager S (2010) Use of the Mirena LNG-IUS and Paragard CuT380A intrauterine devices in nulliparous women. Contraception 81(5):367–371
ACOG practice bulletin (2005) Clinical management guidelines for obstetrician-gynecologists. Number 59, January 2005. Intrauterine device. Obstet Gynecol 105(1):223–232
Sivin I, Schmidt F (1987) Effectiveness of IUDs: a review. Contraception 36(1):55–84
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):141–158
Sivin I (1991) Dose- and age-dependent ectopic pregnancy risks with intrauterine contraception. Obstet Gynecol 78(2):291–298
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
Marchbanks PA, Annegers JF, Coulam CB et al (1988) Risk factors for ectopic pregnancy. A population-based study. JAMA 259(12):1823–1827
Ory HW (1981) Ectopic pregnancy and intrauterine contraceptive devices: new perspectives. The Women’s Health Study. Obstet Gynecol 57(2):137–144
Edelman DA, Porter CW (1987) The intrauterine device and ectopic pregnancy. Contraception 36(1):85–96
Skjeldestad FE (1997) How effectively do copper intrauterine devices prevent ectopic pregnancy? Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 76(7):684–690
Rasheed SM, Abdelmonem AM (2011) Complications among adolescents using copper intrauterine contraceptive devices. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 115(3):269–272
Shimoni N (2010) Intrauterine contraceptives: a review of uses, side effects, and candidates. Semin Reprod Med 28(2):118–125
Vasquez P, Schreiber CA (2010) The missing IUD. Contraception 82(2):126–128
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):295–304
Adoni A, Chetrit BA (1991) The management of intrauterine devices following uterine perforation. Contraception 43(1):77–81
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):401–417
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):1226–1236
O’Brien PA, Marfleet C (2001) Frameless versus classical intrauterine device for contraception. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd003282
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):131–142
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 816:440–450
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):133–141
O’Brien PA, Marfleet C (2005) Frameless versus classical intrauterine device for contraception. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd003282.pub2
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):1–13
Wildemeersch D (2007) New frameless and framed intrauterine devices and systems—an overview. Contraception 75(6 Suppl):S82–S92
Unal C, Eser A, Tozkir E, Wildemeersch D (2018) Comparison of expulsions following intracesarean placement of an innovative frameless copper-releasing IUD (Gyn-CS(R)) versus the TCu380A: a randomized trial. Contraception. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2018.03.034
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):255–259
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):152–154
Wiebe E, Trussell J (2016) Discontinuation rates and acceptability during 1 year of using the intrauterine ball (the SCu380A). Contraception 93(4):364–366
Ocon Medical (2016) Interim first year performance of the IUB SCu300A in comparison with the IUS TCu380A intrauterine device
Ocon Medical (2017) Sicherheit und Wirksamkeit des IUB™ SCu300B (MIDI) nach vorliegenden Pharmakovigilanz-Berichten
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Interessenkonflikt
A. Tramontana gibt an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.
Dieser Beitrag beinhaltet keine von den Autoren durchgeführten Studien an Menschen oder Tieren.
Additional information
Dieser Beitrag wird auch im Journal für Gynäkologische Endokrinologie/Österreich 2018, https://doi.org/10.1007/s41974-018-0073-5 veröffentlicht.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Tramontana, A. UpDate 2018: Kupferspirale, Kupferkette, Kupferperlen-Ball. J. Gynäkol. Endokrinol. 21, 162–166 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41975-018-0072-y
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41975-018-0072-y