THE EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CONTRACEPTION AND REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH CARE
Abstract
Objectives: Misoprostol has been used before intrauterine contraceptive device (IUCD) insertion to prime the cervical os. As the literature about this topic is controversial, we aimed to evaluate IUCD insertion failure, women’s pain perception, use of cervical dilators and prevalence of side effects following the administration of misoprostol. Methods: Trials published in MEDLINE, Scopus, the Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched (last search on 23 October 2019). The primary outcome was IUCD insertion failure; secondary outcomes were women’s pain perception, use of cervical dilators to facilitate insertion, and prevalence of side effects. Results: Fourteen studies were eligible for inclusion. Misoprostol premedication reduced IUCD insertion failure rates and the use of cervical dilators but significantly increased the prevalence of side effects. The risk of IUCD insertion failure with misoprostol premedication was reduced among women who had undergone previous caesarean section and among women who had experienced previous IUCD insertion failure. Nulliparas did not benefit from misoprostol premedication. Buccal misoprostol administration did not seem to be effective in reducing IUCD insertion failure. Visual analogue scale pain scores were increased with both sublingual and buccal misoprostol administration if IUCD insertion was performed ≤2.5 h after misoprostol premedication. Conclusion: Our data demonstrate reduced IUCD insertion failure among women with previous caesarean section and those with previous IUCD insertion failure, suggesting that misoprostol may be a reasonable choice in these groups of women. Although misoprostol premedication reduced insertion failures, it significantly increased side effects and had a heterogeneous pattern of efficacy; thus, its routine use is not supported by the evidence.
