A 12-month multicenter, randomized study comparing the levonorgestrel intrauterine system with the etonogestrel subdermal implant Dan Apter, M.D., Ph.D., Paula Briggs, M.B.Ch.B., Marjo Tuppurainen, M.D., Julia Grunert, M.Sc., Eeva Lukkari-Lax, M.D., Ph.D., Sarah Rybowski, M.B.B.S., Kristina Gemzell-Danielsson, M.D., Ph.D. Fertility and Sterility Volume 106, Issue 1, Pages 151-157.e5 (July 2016) DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.02.036 Copyright © 2016 American Society for Reproductive Medicine Terms and Conditions
Supplemental Figure 1 Disposition of women in the study. aModified intention-to-treat set: all women for whom at least one placement attempt was made. bFull analysis set: all women who had a successful placement/insertion. ENG = etonogestrel; LNG-IUS 8 = levonorgestrel intrauterine system total content 13.5 mg (average, ∼8 μg/24 hours during the first year). Fertility and Sterility 2016 106, 151-157.e5DOI: (10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.02.036) Copyright © 2016 American Society for Reproductive Medicine Terms and Conditions
Supplemental Figure 2 Mean number of bleeding and spotting days by 90-day reference intervalsa (modified intention-to-treat setb) in the LNG-IUS 8 and ENG implant groups. aThe numbers of bleeding and spotting days were not recorded at baseline. bModified intention-to-treat set: all women for whom at least one placement/insertion attempt was made. ENG = etonogestrel; LNG-IUS 8 = levonorgestrel intrauterine system total content 13.5 mg (average, ∼8 μg/24 hours during the first year). Fertility and Sterility 2016 106, 151-157.e5DOI: (10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.02.036) Copyright © 2016 American Society for Reproductive Medicine Terms and Conditions