Fertility and Sterility
Volume 91, Issue 5 , Pages 1646-1653, May 2009

Safety and efficacy of a single-rod etonogestrel implant (Implanon): results from 11 international clinical trials

  • Philip Darney, M.D.

      Affiliations

    • Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, San Francisco General Hospital, University of California, San Francisco, California
    • Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests: Philip D. Darney, M.D., M.Sc., San Francisco General Hospital 6D, 1001 Potrero Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94941.
  • ,
  • Ashlesha Patel, M.D.

      Affiliations

    • Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, John H. Stroger Jr. Hospital of Cook County, Chicago, Illinois
  • ,
  • Kimberly Rosen, M.D.

      Affiliations

    • Organon USA, Roseland, New Jersey
  • ,
  • Lena S. Shapiro, Ph.D.

      Affiliations

    • Organon USA, Roseland, New Jersey
  • ,
  • Andrew M. Kaunitz, M.D.

      Affiliations

    • Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Jacksonville, Florida

Received 15 October 2007; received in revised form 21 February 2008; accepted 21 February 2008. published online 18 April 2008.

Objective

To present efficacy, safety, and bleeding profile results from the clinical trials that supported the U.S. Food and Drug Administration filing for the approval of a single-rod etonogestrel (ENG) contraceptive implant (Implanon).

Design

Integrated analysis of 11 international clinical trials.

Setting

Contraceptive clinics in U.S., Chile, Asia, and Europe.

Patient(s)

A total of 942 healthy women, aged 18 to 40 years.

Intervention(s)

Insertion of an ENG implant. Most women were enrolled in studies lasting either 2 or 3 years.

Main Outcomes Measure(s)

Efficacy was measured by the cumulative Pearl Index in women ≤35 years old. Safety was primarily assessed by incidence of adverse events. Bleeding profiles were analyzed via reference period analyses.

Result(s)

No pregnancies were reported while the ENG implants were in place. Six pregnancies occurred during the first 14 days after ENG implant removal. Including these six pregnancies, the cumulative Pearl Index was 0.38 (year 1 and 2 Pearl Indexes were 0.27 and 0.30, respectively). Common drug-related adverse events were headache, weight gain, acne, breast tenderness, emotional lability, and abdominal pain. Bleeding pattern changes were observed, but no one pattern predominated.

Conclusion(s)

The ENG implant is an efficacious and safe method of contraception which does not require patients' consistent action.

Key Words: Contraceptive implant, etonogestrel, menstruation, desogestrel, levonorgestrel

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 Supported by Organon.

 Dr. Darney has received research funding from Organon and has served as an advisor to Organon. Dr. Patel has served on the Speakers' Bureau for Organon. Dr. Kaunitz has received research funding from Barr, Bayer, Organon, and Warner-Chilcott and has served as a speaker and/or consultant for the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Barr, Bayer, Johnson and Johnson, Organon, and Warner-Chilcott. Dr. Rosen has nothing to disclose. D. Shapiro has nothing to disclose.

PII: S0015-0282(08)00515-3

doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.02.140

Fertility and Sterility
Volume 91, Issue 5 , Pages 1646-1653, May 2009