Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-76dd75c94c-vpfzz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T09:22:07.264Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Case 28 - A 24-Year-Old Woman with a Contraceptive Implant Placed Three Weeks Ago Presents with Positive Pregnancy Test

from Section IV - Contraception and Abortion

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 February 2019

David Chelmow
Affiliation:
Virginia Commonwealth University
Nicole W. Karjane
Affiliation:
Virginia Commonwealth University
Hope A. Ricciotti
Affiliation:
Harvard Medical School
Amy E. Young
Affiliation:
University of Texas, Austin
Get access
Type
Chapter
Information
Office Gynecology
A Case-Based Approach
, pp. 82 - 84
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Curtis, KM, Jatlaoui, TC, Tepper, NK et al. U.S. selected practice recommendations for contraceptive use, 2016. MMWR Recomm Rep 2016;65:1320.Google Scholar
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Increasing access to contraceptive implants and intrauterine devices to reduce unintended pregnancy. Committee Opinion No. 642. Obstet Gynecol 2015;126:e4448.Google Scholar
Charlton, BM, Molgaard-Nielsen, D, Svanstrom, H et al. Maternal use of oral contraceptives and risk of birth defects in Denmark: prospective, nationwide cohort study. BMJ 2016; 352:h6712.Google Scholar
Curtis, KM, Tepper, NK, Jatlaoui, TC et al. U.S. medical eligibility criteria for contraceptive use, 2016. MMWR Recomm Rep 2016;65:1104.Google ScholarPubMed
Callahan, R, Yacobson, I, Halpern, V, Nanda, K. Ectopic pregnancy with use of progestin-only injectables and contraceptive implants: a systematic review. Contraception 2015;92:514522.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raymond, EG, Waever, MA, Tan, Y et al. Effect of immediate compared with delayed insertion of etonogestrel implants on medical abortion efficacy and repeat pregnancy: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 2016;127:306312.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×