Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.
To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser.
Urology journal
…
3 pages
1 file
The intrauterine contraceptive device (IUCD) has been plagued by many complications, including uterine perforation, septic abortion, pelvic abscess, ectopic pregnancy, and migration into adjacent organs.[1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6] Uterine perforation is one of the least common, but most ...
International Journal of Clinical Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 2019
To analyse the factors associated, clinical presentation, exploration strategy and management in patients with impacted and migrated IUCDs at a tertiary care centre. Materials and Methods: A retrospective study in a tertiary care institutional hospital between January 2016-January 2017 among 5 patients diagnosed with impacted and migrated IUCDs. Results: All patient with impacted IUCD presented with pain abdomen. The incidence of IUCD migration seems to be increased in patients who underwent previous caesarean section as seen in this case series (75%). A weakened myometrium may pose as an antecedent risk for such perforation and migration of IUCDs. All patients underwent 3D TVS pelvis as an investigation of choice in missing IUCD tails. All patients were decided for hysteroscopy with laparoscopic guidance for CuT removal and three were converted to laparotomy for failed attempted scopy removal due to complications. Analysing the risk factors associated with these perforations, IUD insertion in the first 0-3 months of delivery and lactation posed a major risk factor for perforation. Conclusion: A 3D TVS PELVIS served as a valuable tool as a first line cost effective investigation in missing IUCD. The post cesarean IUCD insertion can be delayed upto 6 months of delivery to reduce the risk of uterine perforation and impaction. Patient selection and time of insertion and patient education on self-palpation of IUCD thread is also important after IUCDs insertion. The management strategies included hysteroscopy, laparoscopy and laparotomy when attempted scopy removal fails.
Urology, 2002
The intrauterine contraceptive device (IUCD) has been plagued by many complications, including uterine perforation, septic abortion, pelvic abscess, ectopic pregnancy, and migration into adjacent organs.[1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6] Uterine perforation is one of the least common, but most ...
Journal of Reproductive Healthcare and Medicine, 2022
Intrauterine devices (IUDs) are the most commonly used long-term contraception due to their 98–99% effectiveness in preventing pregnancy. There are two types of IUD available in Indonesia, a copper-containing IUD and levonorgestrel-releasing IUD. IUD causes chronic inflammatory changes in the endometrium and fallopian tubes that inhibit fertilization and make a hostile environment for implantation. The increased number of endometrial leukocytes is fatal for sperm. In addition, levonorgestrel will inhibit ovulation. The use of an IUD is associated with side effects and complications. The most commonly met complications are IUD expulsion, displacement, translocation, and pregnancy. The average IUD translocation prevalence is 1.3/1000 which mainly occurs during insertion. Translocated IUD may further cause perforation of the bladder or intestines, intestinal obstruction, fistula formation, abscess, adhesion, undesired pregnancy, and chronic pelvic pain. Regardless of the type and locat...
2011
We highlight a unique case of an intravesical intrauterine contraceptive device (IUCD) that was discovered incidentally in the course of evaluation for secondary infertility in a woman who denied knowledge of insertion of the device. The IUCD was easily retrieved at cystoscopy as a day case procedure. Key Words : Intrauterine Contraceptive Device, Migration, Urinary bladder.
Intrauterine devices (IUDs) are a commonly used form of contraception worldwide. However, migration of the IUD from its normal position in the uterine fundus is a frequently encountered complication, varying from uterine expulsion to displacement into the endometrial canal to uterine perforation. Different sites of IUD translocation vary in terms of their clinical significance and subsequent management, and the urgency of communicating IUD migration to the clinician is likewise variable. Expulsion or intrauterine displacement of the IUD leads to decreased contraceptive efficacy and should be clearly communicated, since it warrants IUD replacement to prevent unplanned pregnancy. Embedment of the IUD into the myometrium can usually be managed in the outpatient clinical setting but occasionally requires hysteroscopic removal. Complete uterine perforation, in which the IUD is partially or completely within the peritoneal cavity, requires surgical management, and timely and direct communication with the clinician is essential in such cases. Careful evaluation for intraabdominal complications is also important, since they may warrant urgent or emergent surgical intervention. The radiologist plays an important role in the diagnosis of IUD migration and should be familiar with its appearance at multiple imaging modalities. © RSNA, 2012 • radiographics.rsna.org Abbreviations: IUD = intrauterine device, 3D = three-dimensional RadioGraphics 2012; 32:335-352 • Published online 10.1148/rg.322115068 • Content Codes:
Journal of Urological Surgery, 2015
Intrauterine device (IUD) is widely used for the long duration of protection, cost-effectiveness and for being a reversible contraceptive method as well as having low complication rates. Despite low complication rates, various IUD-related complications, such as spontaneous aborts, bleeding, infection, and uterine perforation may occur. Although perforation of the uterus by an IUD is not uncommon, bladder perforation is a rare complication. A regular follow-up of patients with IUDs for the complications and training of clinicians for insertion and removal are mandatory to provide better and safe family planning services. Here, we report a case of a patient with uterine perforation with a calcified IUD migration into the the bladder.
Human Reproduction, 2013
What are the symptoms of uterine perforation caused by modern copper intrauterine devices (Cu-IUDs) and the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS); how is perforation detected and what are the findings in abdominal surgery? summary answer: Symptoms are mostly mild and 30% of women are asymptomatic. Surgical findings are mainly minimal; no visceral complications were found in this study. However, adhesions as well as pregnancies seem to be more common among women using Cu-IUDs. what is known already: Prior studies and case reports have suggested that uterine perforation by modern IUDs/IUSs is rarely serious. study design, size, duration: A retrospective study of 75 patients (54 LNG-IUS and 21 Cu-IUD) treated surgically for uterine perforation between 1996 and 2009. participants/materials, setting, methods: The patients treated for uterine perforation by an IUD/IUS at clinics of the Helsinki and Uusimaa Hospital District were identified using the National Care Register for Health Institutions in Finland. The clinical data were collected from individual patient records. main results and the role of chance: The majority of patients (n ¼ 53; 71%) had mild symptoms of abnormal bleeding or abdominal pain or both, in combination with missing IUD/IUS threads. Asymptomatic patients (n ¼ 22; 29%) were examined because of missing threads or pregnancy. Failure to remove the IUD/IUS by pulling visible threads was the reason for referral in seven women (9%) requesting removal of the device. Eleven women (15%) were pregnant. Misplaced IUDs/IUSs were localized by a combination of vaginal ultrasonography (US) and X-ray, hysteroscopy or curettage. Only after this were patients treated by means of laparoscopy. The majority (n ¼ 44; 65%) of the 68 intra-abdominal devices were located in the omentum, the remaining 24 (35%) around the uterus. Partial perforation or myometrial embedding was diagnosed in all seven cases (9%) with visible threads, but unsuccessful removal by pulling. During laparoscopy, filmy adhesions were found in 21 patients (30%). Pregnancy (33 versus 7%, P ¼ 0.009) and intra-abdominal adhesions (58 versus 20%, P ¼ 0.002) were significantly more common in the Cu-IUD group. Infections were rare; one non-specific acute abdominal infection, later found to be unrelated to the IUD, led to laparoscopy and in four cases the IUD was surrounded by pus, but there were no symptoms of infection. limitations, reasons for caution: The study setting revealed only surgically treated symptomatic patients and asymptomatic women attending regular follow-up. Women not treated, but only followed or not attending follow-up, were not identified, excluding the possibility to analyse missed undiagnosed perforations, or conservative follow-up as a treatment option. wider implications of the findings: As surgical findings are minimal, asymptomatic women may need no treatment at all. An alternative form of contraception is, however, important as pregnancies do occur. If a woman plans a pregnancy, a misplaced LNG-IUS should be removed, as it may act as a contraceptive. study funding/competing interest(s): Helsinki University Central Hospital research funds. O.H. has lectured and designed educational events with Bayer AG and MSD, and serves occasionally on scientific advisory boards for these companies. S.S. has
International medical case reports journal, 2024
The intrauterine device is a popular and highly effective form of long-acting reversible contraception. Although generally safe, complications could happen. One of the most serious complications of intrauterine device use is uterine perforation. Risk factors for perforation include, but are not limited to, postpartum period, breastfeeding, levels of experience, and excessive force exerted during insertion. This case is significant because it demonstrates risk factors for uterine perforation, how to handle missing strings, and care in places with little resources. Case Presentation: We discuss the case of a 27-year-old black Ethiopian woman who presented with chronic pelvic pain and had a perforated intrauterine device discovered in the cul-de-sac. The device had been inserted at six weeks postpartum. The client was unable to feel the strings three months after insertion, and a wrong diagnosis of expulsion was made. After one year of insertion, the intrauterine device was located on a plain abdominal radiograph and removed via laparotomy without complications. Conclusion: Although uterine perforation is a rare complication of intrauterine device insertion, special attention should be paid to women with risk factors. In the absence of a witnessed expulsion, assessments and investigations should be carried out before declaring a device expelled. In patients with chronic pelvic pain complaints in the presence of an intrauterine device, perforation and migration outside the uterine cavity should be considered. Abdominal X-rays and laparotomies can be used to find and manage extrauterine migrating devices in environments with limited resources.
Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt
Evangelico Digital, 2024
XII Encontro de Museologia e Autarquias, 2000
Grenzen in der Kunst. Tschechische Kunst in drei Generationen, 2020
International Journal For Multidisciplinary Research, 2024
The Iranian Journal of Neurosurgery, 2023
Criminal Law and Philosophy, 2022
مجله سنجش و ایمنی پرتو, 2021
Musculoskeletal Science and Practice, 2021
Neuroscience Letters, 2012
35th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, 2017
Journal of Chemotherapy
Glycobiology, 2003
International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering, 2020