{"paper_id":"a3318bd0-814e-4fa3-9074-e37031d1f2d9","body_text":"Abstract\nObjective\nThis study is to evaluate the relationship between the uterine volume and the failure of levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device (LNG-IUD) in patients with adenomyosis.\nMethods\nA total of 171 women with adenomysis were treated with LNG-IUD from November 2009 to December 2011. The amount of menorrhagia, degree of dysmenorrhea, and the uterine volume were compared before and after insertion of LNG-IUD, and the treatment failure of LNG-IUD was observed.\nResults\nThe mean age of the participants was 42.5 years (range 29–53 years). The mean uterine volume was 158 mL (range 46–769 mL). Among the total participants, 37 (21.6 %) discontinued the treatment prematurely. There were no different characteristics between the ongoing treatment group and treatment failure group with LNG-IUD. However, there was significant difference of uterine volume between two groups (178 ± 14 and 141 ± 7 mL, P = 0.010). Based on the receiver operator characteristic analysis, the optimum cutoff value of uterine volume more than 150 mL was significantly associated with failure of LNG-IUD (area under curve: 0.763, 95 % CI 0.669–0.856). In univariate analysis, the uterine volume more than 150 mL was the only independent factor for the failure of LNG-IUD (odds ratio 6.76, 95 % CI 1.20–38.02, P = 0.030).\nConclusion\nThe rate of treatment failure after LNG-IUD insertion for the patients with adenomyosis was related to the uterine volume. Specifically, the treatment failure rate of large volume uterus (>150 mL) with LNG-IUD was significantly higher than that of small volume uterus.\nAccess this article\nWe’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.\nPlease try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.\nSimilar content being viewed by others\nReferences\nCho S, Nam A, Kim H, Chay D, Park K, Cho DJ et al (2008) Clinical effects of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device in patients with adenomyosis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 198(373):e1–e7\nYoo HJ, Lee MA, Ko YB, Yang JB, Kang BH, Lee KH (2012) The efficacy of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system in perimenopausal women with menorrhagia or dysmenorrhea. Arch Gynecol Obstet 285:161–166\nSocolov D, Blidaru I, Tamba B, Miron N, Boiculese L, Socolov R (2011) Levonorgestrel releasing-intrauterine system for the treatment of menorrhagia and/or frequent irregular uterine bleeding associated with uterine leiomyoma. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 16:480–487\nAbu Hashim H, Zayed A, Ghayaty E, El Rakhawy M (2013) LNG-IUS treatment of non-atypical endometrial hyperplasia in perimenopausal women: a randomized controlled trial. J Gynecol Oncol 24:128–134\nKaunitz AM, Inki P (2012) The levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system in heavy menstrual bleeding: a benefit-risk review. Drugs 72:193–215\nBazot M, Cortez A, Darai E, Rouger J, Chopier J, Antoine JM et al (2001) Ultrasonography compared with magnetic resonance imaging for the diagnosis of adenomyosis: correlation with histopathology. Hum Reprod 16:2427–2433\nFedele L, Bianchi S, Dorta M, Arcaini L, Zanotti F, Carinelli S (1992) Transvaginal ultrasonography in the diagnosis of diffuse adenomyosis. Fertil Steril 58:94–97\nHigham JM, O’Brien PM, Shaw RW (1990) Assessment of menstrual blood loss using a pictorial chart. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 97:734–739\nDixon JS, Bird HA (1981) Reproducibility along a 10 cm vertical visual analogue scale. Ann Rheum Dis 40:87–89\nDeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL (1988) Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics 44:837–845\nSwets JA (1988) Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic systems. Science 240:1285–1293\nBahamondes L, Diaz J, Marchi NM, Petta CA, Cristofoletti ML, Gomez G (1995) Performance of copper intrauterine devices when inserted after an expulsion. Hum Reprod 10:2917–2918\nMerki-Feld GS, Schwarz D, Imthurn B, Keller PJ (2008) Partial and complete expulsion of the Multiload 375 IUD and the levonorgestrel-releasing IUD after correct insertion. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 137:92–96\nSivin I, Stern J, Coutinho E, Mattos CE, el Mahgoub S, Diaz S et al (1991) Prolonged intrauterine contraception: a seven-year randomized study of the levonorgestrel 20 mcg/day (LNg 20) and the Copper T380 Ag IUDS. Contraception 44:473–480\nReinhold C, Atri M, Mehio A, Zakarian R, Aldis AE, Bret PM (1995) Diffuse uterine adenomyosis: morphologic criteria and diagnostic accuracy of endovaginal sonography. Radiology 197:609–614\nAuthor information\nAuthors and Affiliations\nCorresponding author\nEthics declarations\nConflict of interest\nThe authors have no financial disclosures to declare and no conflicts of interest to report.\nEthical approval\nWhile preparing this manuscript, we have strictly followed not only the instructions for authors as specified by Archives of Gynecology and obstetrics, but also the guidelines of the Ethic Committee of the Chungnam National University Hospital, Korea and the provisions of the Declaration of Helsinki. This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the Chungnam National University Hospital, Korea (2013-08-038). Patient anonymity was completely preserved and the unique nature of identifying patients was not included in this manuscript.\nInformed consent\nThis is retrospective study. Informed consent was not needed to obtain from all individual participants included in the study.\nRights and permissions\nAbout this article\nCite this article\nLee, K.H., Kim, J.K., Lee, M.A. et al. Relationship between uterine volume and discontinuation of treatment with levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine devices in patients with adenomyosis. Arch Gynecol Obstet 294, 561–566 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-016-4105-y\nReceived:\nAccepted:\nPublished:\nIssue date:\nDOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-016-4105-y","source_license":"CC0","license_restricted":false}