AIMS: To share surgical management experiences of intra-abdominal intrauterine devices (IUDs) in tertiary center. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 27 patients were retrospectively analyzed. This retrospective study was conducted between September 1992 and April 2013 at Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology Tepecik Research and Training Hospital, Izmir, Turkey. Demographic findings, diagnostic methods, and operative notes of patients were obtained from the patient file. FINDINGS: Of the 27 IUDs, nine (33.3%) were in omentum, four (15%) were in Douglas pouch, one in left sacrouterine ligament, one in uterovesical space and one in fundus posterior, six (22%) in left adnexial region, one in abdominal wall, one was subdiaphragmatic, one in ligamentum latum, and one in jejunum. Almost all of the patients had TCu-380 A IUDs. Seventeen patients (63%) were managed by laparoscopy, whereas laparotomy was required in ten (37%). Adhesions were found in 23 of 27 (85%) patients with varying degrees. In four cases the incision was extended due to adhesions. CONCLUSION: A missing string was the first finding of an intra-abdominal IUD. Pelvic ultrasonography, X-ray, and hysteroscopy methods should be performed in order to detect the localization of IUD in case of a missing string. Surgical approach should be the first treatment option for intra-abdominal IUDs.
AIMS: To share surgical management experiences of intra-abdominal intrauterine devices (IUDs) in tertiary center. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 27 patients were retrospectively analyzed. This retrospective study was conducted between September 1992 and April 2013 at Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology Tepecik Research and Training Hospital, Izmir, Turkey. Demographic findings, diagnostic methods, and operative notes of patients were obtained from the patient file. FINDINGS: Of the 27 IUDs, nine (33.3%) were in omentum, four (15%) were in Douglas pouch, one in left sacrouterine ligament, one in uterovesical space and one in fundus posterior, six (22%) in left adnexial region, one in abdominal wall, one was subdiaphragmatic, one in ligamentum latum, and one in jejunum. Almost all of the patients had TCu-380 A IUDs. Seventeen patients (63%) were managed by laparoscopy, whereas laparotomy was required in ten (37%). Adhesions were found in 23 of 27 (85%) patients with varying degrees. In four cases the incision was extended due to adhesions. CONCLUSION: A missing string was the first finding of an intra-abdominal IUD. Pelvic ultrasonography, X-ray, and hysteroscopy methods should be performed in order to detect the localization of IUD in case of a missing string. Surgical approach should be the first treatment option for intra-abdominal IUDs.
Authors: Hassan Aboughalia; Deepashri Basavalingu; Margarita V Revzin; Laura E Sienas; Douglas S Katz; Mariam Moshiri Journal: Abdom Radiol (NY) Date: 2021-06-15