Hum. Reprod. Advance Access originally published online on October 27, 2005
Human Reproduction 2006 21(2):466-470; doi:10.1093/humrep/dei358
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
A prospective study of the forearm bone density of users of etonorgestrel- and levonorgestrel-releasing contraceptive implants
1 Human Reproduction Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, School of Medicine, Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP), 13084-971, Campinas, SP, Brazil
2 To whom correspondence should be addressed at: Caixa Postal 6181, 13084-971, Campinas, SP, Brazil. E-mail: bahamond{at}caism.unicamp.br
BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to compare bone mineral density (BMD) before insertion and at 18 months of use of etonorgestrel- and levonorgestrel-releasing contraceptive implants. METHODS: One hundred and eleven women, 19–43 years of age, were randomly allocated to two groups: 56 to etonorgestrel and 55 to levonorgestrel. BMD was evaluated at the midshaft of the ulna and at the distal radius of the non-dominant forearm using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry before insertion and at 18 months of use. RESULTS: There was no difference in baseline demographic or anthropometric characteristics, or in BMD of users of either model of implant. BMD was significantly lower at 18 months of use at the midshaft of the ulna in both groups of users. However, no difference was found at the distal radius. Multiple linear regression analysis showed that the variables associated with BMD at 18 months of use in both implant groups were baseline BMD, body mass index (BMI) and difference in BMI (0 versus 18 months of use). CONCLUSIONS: Women of 19–43 years of age using either one of the implants showed lower BMD at 18 months of use at the midshaft of the ulna, however, without a difference at the distal radius.
Key words: bone mineral density/contraceptive implants/etonorgestrel/levonorgestrel