Article Text
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Background
Intrauterine contraception is available as either copper-containing intrauterine devices (Cu-IUDs) or a levonorgestrel intrauterine system (LNG-IUS).1 Until recently the Mirena® LNG-IUS (Bayer plc) which contains 52 mg levonorgestrel has been the only licensed LNG-IUS available in the UK.
Jaydess® (Bayer plc) is a LNG-IUS that was launched in the UK market in April 2014. It has been designed with smaller dimensions than Mirena. As a result the LNG content and release rate are lower (Tables 1 and 2). It is known as Skyla® in the USA, where it has been licensed since 2013.6 Jaydess will not replace Mirena but is instead intended to afford women greater contraceptive choice. The differences and similarities between Jaydess and Mirena are summarised in Box 1.7
- In this window
- In a new window
- In this window
- In a new window
Key differences and similarities between Jaydess® and Mirena® (adapted from Ref. 7 with permission)
Key differences from the Mirena LNG-IUS
-
The core of the Jaydess levonorgestrel intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) contains 13.5 mg LNG compared with 52 mg LNG in the Mirena LNG-IUS
-
Jaydess is licensed for 3 years, whereas Mirena is licensed for 5 years of contraceptive use
-
Jaydess has a smaller frame and narrower inserter tube
-
The release rates and serum levels of LNG are lower
-
Jaydess is only licensed for contraception (see licensed indications in Table 1)
-
Women using Jaydess are less likely to experience amenorrhoea
-
Higher failure rates and ectopic pregnancy rates have been reported in some trials of Jaydess but numbers are currently too small to confirm a significant difference
-
Jaydess carries a silver ring on its stem that distinguishes it from other intrauterine devices on ultrasound scan or X-ray
-
Safety and efficacy information for Jaydess in women aged under 18 years is not yet available
-
The Summary of Product Characteristics (SPC) for Jaydess …
Footnotes
-
Competing interests None.
-
Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.
Linked Articles
- Highlights from this issue