Removal of a fractured Nexplanon®

Alyson Elliman

doi:10.1136/jfprhc-2012-100491

Responses

Letters to the editor

Removal of a fractured Nexplanon^®

Compose a Response to This Article

Compose Response

Title *

Author Information

Contributors
First Name and Middle Initial * First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'. Last Name * Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'. Email Address * Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com Occupation * Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'. Affiliation * Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.

Statement of Competing Interests

Competing interests? *

Yes

Please describe the competing interests

PLEASE NOTE:

A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in a BMJ journal; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed unless it is also republished as a Letter, Correspondence or as other content. Find out more about rapid responses.
We intend to post all responses which are approved by the Editor, within 14 days (BMJ Journals) or 24 hours (The BMJ), however timeframes cannot be guaranteed. Responses must comply with our requirements and should contribute substantially to the topic, but it is at our absolute discretion whether we publish a response, and we reserve the right to edit or remove responses before and after publication and also republish some or all in other BMJ publications, including third party local editions in other countries and languages
Our requirements are stated in our rapid response terms and conditions and must be read. These include ensuring that: i) you do not include any illustrative content including tables and graphs, ii) you do not include any information that includes specifics about any patients,iii) you do not include any original data, unless it has already been published in a peer reviewed journal and you have included a reference, iv) your response is lawful, not defamatory, original and accurate, v) you declare any competing interests, vi) you understand that your name and other personal details set out in our rapid response terms and conditions will be published with any responses we publish and vii) you understand that once a response is published, we may continue to publish your response and/or edit or remove it in the future.
By submitting this rapid response you are agreeing to our terms and conditions for rapid responses and understand that your personal data will be processed in accordance with those terms and our privacy notice.

I agree to and have read the terms and conditions for rapid responses and BMJ Privacy Notice *

CAPTCHA

This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

Experience and removal of damaged implants
Janet Bentley
Published on: 13 May 2016

Published on: 13 May 2016
Experience and removal of damaged implants
- Janet Bentley
Dr Elliman[1] asked whether other clinicians had experience of damaged implants. Rekers[2] replied that breakage is rare and would not alter contraceptive efficacy.
I have removed damaged implants from seven patients since June 2011, all of which were sited correctly. Two patients underwent subsequent removal of a second damaged implant. All the patients were aware of abnormality, but only one remembered trauma...
Show More

Dr Elliman[1] asked whether other clinicians had experience of damaged implants. Rekers[2] replied that breakage is rare and would not alter contraceptive efficacy.
I have removed damaged implants from seven patients since June 2011, all of which were sited correctly. Two patients underwent subsequent removal of a second damaged implant. All the patients were aware of abnormality, but only one remembered trauma. One had positive home pregnancy tests from 3 days after implant removal, suggesting method failure.
The first patient requested exchange of a bent Nexplanon at 10 months. She described an injury 4 months previously. She felt unwell and had experienced recent heavy bleeding in place of the initial amenorrhoea. Pickard and Bacon[3] described bleeding in association with a damaged implant. I chose incision over the bend but found that the two halves were attached by the rate-limiting membrane.
The second patient attended for Nexplanon exchange at 5 months, describing 'popping' in her arm and a broken implant. This implant was completely fractured. Both halves popped out easily via an incision over the break, which I also used for reinsertion. Five months later the patient requested removal because of burning pain at the implant site. A colleague removed the implant and recorded that it was bent in several places. The patient reported three positive pregnancy tests during the next 7 days followed by heavy bleeding with clots. A pregnancy test 8 days after implant removal was negative.
The third patient requested Nexplanon exchange for bending at 8 months. The usual removal technique revealed two incomplete fractures of the core. I used the same incision for reinsertion. Three days later the patient experienced pain and again found abnormal bending. She demanded immediate removal. I acquiesced and found minor cracking of the implant core.
I performed early removal because of a bent Nexplanon for a fourth patient 15 months after insertion.
Two further patients were aware of Nexplanon damage but attended for removal because they wanted to get pregnant. One attended at 16 months and underwent the usual removal technique, which revealed two central bends. The other woman who attended at 24 months had a complete break in her implant that required a second incision for the proximal half. I had quickly checked that the implant was palpable and hadn't enquired about possible damage. When the first half popped out the patient confirmed that she had suspected the implant was broken for many months. These were the only two implants with identical batch numbers.
A final patient only reported her bent Implanon when attending for routine exchange after 3 years.
All the cases I have described except the final one involve Nexplanon. In my previous years of experience with Implanon I had been unaware of any cases involving implant damage. Structurally Nexplanon differs from Implanon by the addition of 3% barium. Unlike Implanon, Nexplanon cannot slip in its inserter, and errors during the insertion process seem unlikely to explain the apparent increased frequency of damage.
I would be interested to know whether other Journal readers have noticed an increase in damaged implants since Nexplanon replaced Implanon.
I routinely use the same incision for reinsertion, but having two patients attend with recurrent damage might suggest that this practice should be avoided.
Only two of these damaged implants were completely broken. Doshi[4] suggested that taking an X-ray of the bent Nexplanon might help clarify the situation. In practice my patients were unhappy with the bent device and wanted it removed even if it wasn't fractured. Removing partially fractured implants using the usual pop-out technique is the simplest and least traumatic method of removal but it does carry the risk of needing a second small incision if the implant is truly broken. An incision over the centre of an implant that is only bent needs to be a little larger in order to remove the implant in its bent form. I would suggest careful enquiry and examination, and unless the implant is clearly in two pieces I would recommend that the usual pop-out removal technique be employed.
References
1. Elliman A. Removal of a fractured Nexplanon?. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care 2013;39:66-67.
2. Rekers K. Removal of a fractured Nexplanon?: MSD response. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care 2013;39:67.
3. Pickard S, Bacon L. Persistent vaginal bleeding in a patient with a broken Implanon?. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care 2002;28:207-208.
4. Doshi J. Bent Implanon?. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care 2011;37:126.
Conflict of Interest:
None declared
Show Less

Conflict of Interest:
None declared.
- Back to top

Main menu

Plain text

PLEASE NOTE:

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

Conflict of Interest:

Log in using your username and password

Main menu

Log in using your username and password

You are here

Plain text

PLEASE NOTE:

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

Conflict of Interest:

Read the full text or download the PDF:

Log in using your username and password