Literature DB >> 16133630

Incidental detection of a transmigrated intrauterine device.

Jeffrey M Levsky1, Mark Herskovits.   

Abstract

The intrauterine device (IUD) is among the most effective forms of birth control available, with important advantages over other methods of contraception. The most striking adverse event associated with IUD use is uterine perforation and migration of the device. Contrary to what one might assume, perforation is often silent and the wayward device is either detected after further sequellae or found incidentally by imaging. The radiologist should be aware of the natural course, presentations, diagnostic evaluation and treatment (if any) for this misplaced foreign body.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16133630     DOI: 10.1007/s10140-005-0421-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Emerg Radiol        ISSN: 1070-3004


  10 in total

1.  Analysis of risk factors associated with uterine perforation by intrauterine devices.

Authors:  E Caliskan; N Oztürk; B O Dilbaz; S Dilbaz
Journal:  Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 1.848

2.  Uterine perforation on intrauterine device insertion: is the incidence higher than previously reported?

Authors:  Mira Harrison-Woolrych; Janelle Ashton; David Coulter
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 3.375

3.  Extrauterine mislocated IUD: is surgical removal mandatory?

Authors:  Ofer Markovitch; Zvi Klein; Yariv Gidoni; Michael Holzinger; Yoram Beyth
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 3.375

4.  Sciatica caused by an intrauterine device after silent uterine perforation. A case report.

Authors:  R M Elmer
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1978-03       Impact factor: 5.284

5.  IUDs and transmigration -- putting an old concern to rest.

Authors:  M M Singh
Journal:  IPPF Med Bull       Date:  1995-02

6.  The management of intrauterine devices following uterine perforation.

Authors:  A Adoni; A Ben Chetrit
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  1991-01       Impact factor: 3.375

7.  Appendicitis caused by an intrauterine contraceptive device.

Authors:  I Serra
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1986-11       Impact factor: 6.939

8.  Uterine perforation and embedding by intrauterine device: evaluation by US and hysterography.

Authors:  R Rosenblatt; D Zakin; W Z Stern; R Kutcher
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1985-12       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Location of intrauterine devices: evaluation by computed tomography.

Authors:  M L Richardson; R E Kinard; D H Watters
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1982-03       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  Colocolic fistula caused by a previously inserted intrauterine device. Case report.

Authors:  I R Pirwany; K Boddy
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  1997-11       Impact factor: 3.375

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.