The value of misoprostol administration before intrauterine contraceptive device insertion: a systematic review and meta-analysis

• Published in: Middle East Fertility Society Journal 2024-12, Vol.29 (1), p.54-19
• Main Authors: Maged, Ahmed M, El-Goly, Nour A, Bassiouny , Nehal, El-Demiry , Nihal, AbdelAziz , Suzi
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Analgesics; Analysis; Bias; Clinical trials; Confidence; Contraceptives; Copper; Intrauterine contraceptive device; Intrauterine devices; IUCD; IUD; IUD insertion; Misoprostol; Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs; Registration; Systematic review; Vagina
• ISSN: 1110-5690; 2090-3251
• DOI: 10.1186/s43043-024-00210-9

Objectives To assess the value of misoprostol administration before IUD insertion. Search strategy Screening of PubMed, Scopus, Web Of Science, ScienceDirect, and clinical trials registry till April 2024 using the keywords misoprostol, prostaglandin E1 analogue, IUD, IUCD, intrauterine device, IUD insertion, and their MeSH terms. Selection criteria All RCTs that included misoprostol administration before IUD insertion. All doses, routes, and times of administration of misoprostol compared to placebo, analgesics, or other prostaglandins were included. This review included 19 RCTs including 2743 women (1333 had misoprostol administration and 1410 comparators (1281 received placebo, 16 received diclofenac, 43 received dinoglandin, and 70 received lignocaine). Data collection and analysis The extracted data included location setting, number of participants randomized and analyzed, participants selection criteria, the exact intervention details (including misoprostol dose, route and timing of administration, the comparator group details, and type of IUD inserted), primary and secondary outcomes of the trial ( including pain score, easiness of insertion score, the need for analgesics, the need for additional measures as cervical dilatation, failure of insertion, complications of the insertions process, and drug side effects), risk of bias of the included studies, and trial registration number and site. Main results Failure of IUD insertion was evaluated in 9 studies with 1350 participants and revealed an odd ratio (OR) of 0.87 with 0.39-1.98 95% CI, P value = 0.75, and I.sup.2 score = 45%. The easiness score of insertion was evaluated in 7 studies with 780 participants and revealed an OR of - 1.12 with - 1.73 to 0.52 95% CI, P value < 0.001, and I.sup.2 score = 87%. The pain VAS was evaluated in 13 studies with 1776 participants and revealed a mean difference (MD) of - 0.23 with - 0.77 to 0.31 95% CI, P value = 0.41, and I.sup.2 score = 90%. The participants satisfaction score was evaluated in 3 studies with 366 participants and revealed a MD of 1.64 with 0.68-2.60 95% CI, P value < 0.001, and I.sup.2 score = 91%. The need for analgesics and additional measures as cervical dilatation were evaluated in 7 and 4 studies with 813 and 295 participants respectively. The reported OR (95% CI), P values, and I.sup.2 scores were 0.58 (0.32-1.03) and 0.79 (0.33-1.92), 0.06 and 0.61, and 48% and 35% respectively. Conclusion Misoprostol administration before IUD insertion wa