Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Uterine Geometry and IUD Performance

  • Chapter
Book cover Medicated Intrauterine Devices

Part of the book series: Developments in Obstetrics and Gynecology ((DIOG,volume 5))

Abstract

Individual variations in the size and shape of the human uterus are probably greater than variations in the size and shape of the human foot. It is, therefore, unfortunate that, whereas individual fitting of shoes is an accepted custom, selective fitting of IUDs is not. Furthermore, the current method of selecting IUD size, on the basis of bimanual pelvic examination and sounding of the uterus for total axial dimension, is grossly inadequate. Estimating external uterine size does not give an indication of the internal dimensions of the endometrial cavity (Wittman and Chow 1976; Tejuja and Malkani 1969), and measuring total uterine length is not useful in identifying endometrial cavity length (Hasson 1976; Wittman and Chow 1976). As IUDs are normally placed in the endometrial cavity exclusive of the cervical canal, knowledge of cervical length is essential for the proper placement of an IUD above the cervix; knowledge of endometrial cavity dimensions is necessary for proper fitting of the device.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Adel SK, Ghoneim MA, Sobrero AJ: Hysterography study of long-term effects of intrauterine contraceptive devices. Fertil Steril 22: 651, 1971.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Advisory Committee on Obstetrics and Gynecology: Report on intrauterine contraceptive devices, Washington DC, Food and Drug Administration, 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  • Behrman SJ, Burchfield W: The intrauterine contraceptive device and myometrial activity. Am J Obstet Gynecol 100: 194, 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  • Behrman SJ, Archie JT, O’Brien OP: Myometrial activity and the IUCD II: propagation waves. Am J Obstet Gynecol 104: 123, 1969.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bernstine RL, Davidson AR, Duncan GW, et al.: Review and analysis of the scientific and clinical data on the safety, efficacy, adverse reactions, biological action, utilization, and design of intrauterine devices, Springfield, Va, US Department of Commerce, National Technical Information Service, PB-249-614, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burnhill MS, Birnberg CH: The size and shape of the uterine cavity determined by hysterography with an intrauterine contraceptive device as a marker. Int J Fertil 11: 187, 1966.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Crosby WM, Hill EC: Embryology of the Müllerian duct system: review of present-day theory. Obstet Gynecol 20: 507, 1962.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dass A, Bhagat S, Bhargava K, et al.: Hysterography and the Lippes Loop. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 9: 232, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis HJ, Israel R: Uterine cavity measurements in relation to design of intra-uterine contraceptive devices. In: Intra-uterine contraception, Segal SJ, Southan AL (eds), Amsterdam, Excerpta Medica International Congress, Series 86, 1964, p 135 – 141.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guidoin R, Courtney JM, Brault R, et al.: Intra-uterine devices: a SEM study on the Dalkon Shield. Biomater Med Devices Artif Organs 4: 81, 1976.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hafez ESE, Barnhart MI, Ludwig H, et al.: Scanning electron microscopy of human reproductive physiology. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand [Suppl] 40: 8, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hasson HM: Differential uterine measurements recorded in vivo. Obstet Gynecol 43: 400, 1974.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hasson HM: Ballooned uterine elevator cannula. Am J Obstet Gynecol 123: 658, 1975.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hasson HM: Copper IUDs. J Reprod Med 20: 139, 1978a.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hasson HM: Factors that affect IUD performance: a review and recommendations. J Reprod Med 21: 137, 1978b.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hasson HM, Berger GS, Edelman DA: Factors affecting IUD performance I: endometrial cavity length. Am J Obstet Gyne¬col 126: 973, 1976.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Howard G: Use of intrauterine devices in nulliparous women, Lancet 2: 1339, 1972.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Joelsson I, Gidlund L, Anzen B, et al.: In vivo determination of the stress-strain relation of the human myometrium. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 55: 325, 1976.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Johnstone FD, Boyd IE, McArthy TG, et al.: The diameter of the uterine isthmus during the menstrual cycle, pregnancy and the puerperium. J Obst Gyn Br Comm 81: 558, 1974.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kamal I, Hefnawi F, Ghoneim M, et al.: Dimensional and architectural disproportion between the intrauterine device and the uterine cavity: a cause of bleeding. Fertil Steril 22: 514, 1971.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kamal I, Ghoneim M, Talaat M, et al.: Retention and expulsion of IUDs. In: Analysis of intrauterine contraception, Hefnawi F, Segal SJ (eds), Amsterdam, North-Holland Publishing, 1975, p 359 – 366.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kar AB, Chandra H: Uterine bleeding in rhesus monkeys after insertion of an intrauterine device. Indian J Exp Biol 3: 269, 1965.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Khatamee MA, Lehfeldt H: Hysterographic studies in women wearing copper T devices. Adv Planned Parenthood 10: 90, 1975.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Landeman R, Kay R, Wilson K: A two man experience with the Copper T intrauterine device. Contraception 7: 477, 1973.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis RG, Zuspan FP: A method for determining contour volume of the uterine cavity. Contraception 2: 249, 1970.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lomax CW, Harbert GM, Thornton WN: Actinomycosis of the female genital tract. Obstet Gynecol 48: 341, 1976.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mann EC: Cineradiographic observations on intra-uterine contraceptive devices. In: Intra-uterine contraceptive devices, Tietze C, Lewit S (eds), Amsterdam, Excerpta Medica international congress series 54, 1962, p 91 – 96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mann EC, McLarn WD, Hayt DB: The physiology and clinical significance of the uterine isthmus I: the two-stage intrauterine balloon in the diagnosis and treatment of cervical incompe¬tence. Am J Obstet Gynecol 81: 209, 1961.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Margolis AJ: A fluid-filled intrauterine device: initial clinical trials. Am J Obstet Gynecol 122: 470, 1975.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mazher K, Kamal I, Hefnawi F, et al.: A simple technic of hysterography for evaluating side effects and mode of action of intrauterine devices. Fertil Steril 18: 353, 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newton J, Elias J, McEwan J, et al.: Evaluation of the Copper 7 in England. In: Analysis of intrauterine contraception, Hef¬nawi F, Segal S (eds), Amsterdam, North-Holland Publishing, 1975, p 291 – 302.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nygren KG, Johansson EDB: Retrograde cervical perforation by the Copper T device. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 53: 383, 1974.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ostergard DR: The Dalkon Shield intrauterine device: a review of current status. J Reprod Med 14: 64, 1975.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pharriss BB: Clinical experience with the intrauterine progreste- rone contraceptive system. J Reprod Med 20: 155, 1978.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Phatak LV: Intrauterine distortion and displacement of an IUD. Indian J Med Res 57: 89, 1969.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Püroinen O, Kaihola HL: Uterine size measured by ultrasound during the menstrual cycle. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 54: 247, 1975.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rozin S, Schwartz A, Shenker JC: Studies of the mode of action of intrauterine contraceptive device. Obstet Gynecol 30: 855, 1967.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sakurabayashi M, Mohri T, Ono T, et al.: Studies on intrau¬terine contraceptive devices IV: the position of IUD in the cavity of uterus and nidation of fertilized ova. Acta Obst Gyn Jpn 16: 275, 1969.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schiffer MA, Elguezabal A, Sultana M, et al.: Actinomycosis infections associated with intrauterine contraceptive devices. Obstet Gynecol 45: 67, 1975.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Scommegna A, Avila T, Luna M, et al.: Fertility control by intrauterine release of progesterone. Obstet Gynecol 43: 769, 1974.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Scott WC: Pelvic abscess in association with intrauterine contraceptive device. Am J Obstet Gynecol 131: 149, 1978.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Shaila NG, Lane ME, Sobrero AJ: A comparative randomized double-blind study of the Copper-T 200 and Copper-7 intrau-terine contraceptive devices with modified insertion tech¬niques. Am J Obstet Gynecol 120: 110, 1974.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Shaw ST, Moyer DL: Problem bleeding with IUDs In: Intrauterine devices: development, evaluation and program implementation, Wheeler RG, Duncan GW, Speidel J J (eds), New York, Academic Press, 1974, p 99 – 103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shirley RL: The Dalkon Shield in private practice: a disappointment. Am J Obstet Gynecol 121: 564, 1975.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Shubeck F: Use of polymerizing plastics in pregnancy prevention: preliminary report. Obstet Gynecol 25: 724, 1965.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sivanesaratnam VV, Puvan IS, Sinnathuray TA: Evaluation of Copper 7 intrauterine device in Malaysian Women. Med J Aust 2: 298, 1975.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Strecker JR, Kraus H: Unusual uterine perforation by the Copper T intrauterine device and removal by laparoscopy. Contraception 13: 47, 1976.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tacchi D: Uterine perforation by a Saf-T-Coil intrauterine contraceptive device. J Obst Gyn Br Comm 75: 1176, 1968.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tatum HG: Clinical aspects of intrauterine contraception: cir-cumspection 1976. Fertil Steril 28: 3, 1977.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor ES, McMillan JH, Greer BE, et al: The intrauterine device and tubo-ovarian abscess. Am J Obstet Gynecol 123: 338, 1975.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor WW, Martin FG, Pritchard SA, et al.: Complications from Majzlin spring intrauterine device. Obstet Gynecol 41: 404, 1973.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tejuja S, Malkani PK: Clinical significance of correlation between size of uterine cavity and IUD: a study by planimeter- hysterogram technique. Am J Obstet Gynecol 105: 620, 1969.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tietze C: Evaluation of intrauterine devices: ninth progress report: cooperating statistical program. Stud Fam Plann 55: 1, 1970.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wei PY: Downward displacement of IUDs and related problems of accidental pregnancy and cervical penetration. In: Analysis of intrauterine contraception, Hefnawi F, Segal SJ (eds), Amsterdam, North-Holland Publishing, 1975, p 367 - 371.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wheeler RG, Buschbom RL, Marshall RK: A rational basis for IUD design and development. In: Intrauterine devices: development, evaluation and program implementation, Wheeler RG, Duncan GW, Speidel JJ (eds), New York, Academic Press, 1974, p 163 – 190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wittman BK, Chow TTS: Diagnostic ultrasound in the management of patients using intrauterine contraceptive devices. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 83: 802, 1976.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Youssef AF: The uterine isthmus and its sphincteric mechanism, a radiographic study I: the uterine isthmus under normal conditions. Am J Obstet Gynecol 75: 1305, 1958.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zador G, Nilsson BA, Nilsson B, et al.: Clinical experience with the uterine progesterone system (Progestasert). Contraception 13: 559, 1976.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zipper JA, Tatum JH, Pastene L, et al.: Metallic copper as an intrauterine contraceptive adjunct to the T device. Am J Obstet Gynecol 105: 1274, 1969.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. H. M. Hasson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Detroit, Michigan, USA

    E. S. E. Hafez

  2. Haarlem, The Netherlands

    W. A. A. Van Os

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1980 Martinus Nijhoff Publishers bv, The Hague

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hasson, H.M. (1980). Uterine Geometry and IUD Performance. In: Hafez, E.S.E., Van Os, W.A.A. (eds) Medicated Intrauterine Devices. Developments in Obstetrics and Gynecology, vol 5. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-8872-9_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-8872-9_2

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-009-8874-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-009-8872-9

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation