Clinical evaluation of U-coil XXXX releasing device versus inert U-coil IUD.

@entity1 @entity1420 @entity548 @entity1834 @entity2371 @entity158
76 @entity1 were randomly selected to be fitted with U-Coil intrauterine device. The inert U-Coil device was inserted in 39 @entity1 and the @entity1420 releasing U-coil device was inserted in 37 @entity1 . @entity1 fitted with both types of device were followed up for 12 postinserton months. The main side effects of the device were expulsion, removal for pelvic @entity158 and @entity548 and @entity1834 . No expulsion in those @entity1 fitted with inert U-coil device was reported. Expulsion of the @entity1420 U-coil device occurred in 3 @entity1 (8.1%). Removal for @entity548 and @entity158 in @entity1 fitted with inert U-coil was necessary in 2 @entity1 (5.1%). In @entity1 fitter with @entity1420 U-coil, removal for @entity548 and @entity158 was necessary in 1 @entity1 (2.2%). @entity2371 was reported in 10 @entity1 (25.6%) fitted with inert U-coil device, while it was reported in 1o @entity1 (35.1%) fitted with @entity1420 U-coil device. @entity1834 occurred in 29 @entity1 (74.4%) fitted with inert U-coil device compared to 19 @entity1 (59.5%) fitted with @entity1420 U-coil device. All removals of inert U-coil device th removal for @entity548 and @entity158 was only 1 case with uterus in anteverted position and in 1 expulsion the uterus was in midosition.
