ArticleThe Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine2022
Does a Bleeding Disorder Lessen the Efficacy of the 52-mg Levonorgestrel-Releasing Intrauterine System for Heavy Menstrual Bleeding in Adolescents? A Retrospective Multicenter Study.
Article in The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- The interplay of von Willebrand disease and women's reproductive health.Blood advances · 2026Review
- Phase-Based Management of Heavy Menstrual Bleeding in Women with Bleeding Disorders: From Acute Control to Long-Term Maintenance.International journal of women's health · 2026Review
- How should abnormal uterine bleeding be managed in people with bleeding disorders: a systematic review of the literature and thematic synthesis.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2025Review
- Menstrual Disorders in Adolescence: Diagnostic and Therapeutic Challenges.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this study is to compare the patient-reported bleeding outcomes and complication rates with the use of the 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (52-LNG-IUS) for treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) among adolescents with and without a diagnosed inherited bleeding disorder (BD) within the first 12 months after insertion.
methodsRetrospective chart review was conducted of adolescents ages 14-21 years, with and without an inherited BD, who underwent 52-LNG-IUS insertion between September 2013 and February 2020 for the treatment of HMB.
resultsOne hundred forty-four 52-LNG-IUS insertions among 139 subjects were evaluated. Fifty-nine (41%) of these were among adolescents with a diagnosed inherited BD, and 85 (59%) were among those without a BD. Among subjects with follow-up, documentation of patient-reported bleeding outcome, and a retained IUS (92/144), both groups subjectively reported improvement in bleeding outcome, with 91.7% (33/36) of those with a BD and 94.6% (53/56) of those without a BD reporting that bleeding outcome was better than prior to IUS insertion (p = .675). There was no statistically significant difference in the rate of spontaneous expulsion (p = .233), with the rate of expulsion in the first 12 months after placement among those with a BD of 13.7% (7/51) and 6.8% for those without a BD (5/72). DISCUSSION: Adolescents with HMB both with and without an inherited BD benefit from the 52-LNG-IUS for the treatment of HMB. Rates of spontaneous IUS expulsion are not statistically different regardless of the presence of a BD and are similar to rates found in other studies of intrauterine device use in adolescents.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.