Recent progress in the use of copper IUDs

  • Alain J. M. Audebert


An increasing world-wide utilization of IUDs represents one of the main events in the field of contraception during the past decade. This is due to many factors, but some are directly related to improvements in design. A major advance was achieved when medicated IUDs were made readily suitable for clinical use. The initial contribution was made by Zipper et al.1 and Doyle and Clewe2, who, simultaneously in 1968, focussed on using the IUD as a carrier for an active antifertility agent: respectively, metallic copper and a synthetic progestin.


Intrauterine Device Expulsion Rate Menstrual Blood Loss Insertion Procedure Lower Pregnancy Rate 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Zipper, J. A., Medel, M. and Prager, R. (1968). Experimental suppression of fertility by intrauterine copper and zinc in rabbits. In Abstracts of the Sixth World Congress on Fertility and Sterility, Tel Aviv, Israel, May 20–27, p. 154Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Doyle, L. L. and Clewe, T. (1968). Preliminary studies on the effect of hormone-releasing intra-uterine devices. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol., 101, 564PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mishell, D. R. (1975). The clinical factor in evaluating IUDs. In Hefnawi, F. and Segal, S. (eds.), Analysis of Intra-uterine Contraception, p. 27. ( Amsterdam: North-Holland )Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jarvela, S. (1981). Problems in the comparison of clinical performance of IUDs. Contracept. Deliv. Syst., 2, 87PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Randic, L. (1980). Comparative evaluation of medicated and non-medicated IUDs of the same size and shape. Contracept. Deliv. Syst., 1, 87PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    El-Badrawi, M. H., Hafez, E. S. E., Barnhart, M. I., Fayad, M. and Shafeek, A. (1981). Ultrastructural changes in human endometrium with copper and non medicated IUDs in utero. Fertil. Steril., 36, 41Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Prema, K., Lakshmi, B. A. R. and Babu, S. (1980). Serum copper in long-term users of copper intra-uterine devices. Fertil. Steril., 34, 32PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Larsson, B., Astrom, G., Einarsson, S., et al. (1981). The possible risks of a copper and an inert intra-uterine device situated in the abdominal cavity: an experimental study in pigs and dogs. Fertil. Steril., 36, 229PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Larsson, B., Hagstrom, B., Viberg, L. and Hamberger, L. (1981). Long term clinical experience with the Cu-7-IUD - Evaluation of a prospective study. Contraception, 23, 387PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kosonen, A. and Thiery, M. (1983). Corrosion of filamentous intra-uterine copper. The MLCu250 and MLCu375. Contraception, 27, 85PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Diaz, J., Diaz, M. M., Pastene, L., Araki, R. and Faundes, A. (1982). Randomized clinical study of the T-Cu 380 A and the Lippes Loop C, in Campinas, Brazil. Contraception, 26, 221PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sivin, I. and Tatum, H. J. (1981). Four year experience with the TCu380 A intrauterine contraceptive device. Fertil. Steril., 36, 159PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Goh, T. H., Sinnathoray, T. A., Sivanesaratnah, V. and Sen, D. K. (1983). A randomised comparative evaluation of the Copper 7, Multiload Copper 250 and T-Copper-220 C IUDs. Contraception, 27, 75PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Van der Pas, H., Van Os, W. and Thiery, M. (1983). Performance of multiload IUD models with different copper load. Contracept. Deliv. Syst. (In press)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Allonen, H., Luukkainen, T., Nielsen, N. C., Nygren, K. G. and Pyorala, T. (1980). Two year rates for NOVA-T and copper T in a comparative study. Contraception, 21, 321PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Nygren, K. G., Nielsen, N. C., Pyorala, T., Allonen, H. and Luukkainen, T. (1981). Intrauterine contraception with Nova-T and Copper T-200. Contraception, 24, 529PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fylling, P. and Fagerhol, M. (1979). Experience with two different medicated intrauterine devices: a comparative study of the progestasert and Nova-T. Fertil. Steril., 31, 138PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nilsson, C. G., Luukkainen, T., Diaz, J. and Allonen, H. (1982). Clinical performance of a new levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device. A randomized comparison with a Nova-T-Copper device. Contraception, 25, 345PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Phariss, B. B. (1978). Clinical experience with the intrauterine progesterone contraceptive system. J. Reprod. Med., 20, 155Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gibor, Y. and Mitchell, C. (1980). Selected events following insertion of the Progestasert system. Contraception, 21, 491PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wan, L. S. (1981). Clinical experience with Progestasert beyond one year of use. Contracept. Deliv. Syst., 2, 243PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© MTP Press Limited 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alain J. M. Audebert

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations