Literature DB >> 6823347

Risk of uterine perforation among users of intrauterine devices.

S F Heartwell, S Schlesselman.   

Abstract

Since 1965 there has been a substantial increase in the number of women in the United States who use the intrauterine contraceptive device (IUD). A collaborative multicenter case--control study was conducted to examine uterine perforation and uterine incarceration as well as several other suspected complications related to use of an IUD. To determine which attributes of the IUD and which user characteristics contribute to the risk of uterine perforation and incarceration, the authors analyzed 32 women with uterine perforation requiring transperitoneal removal, 106 women with uterine incarceration of an IUD which was removed transcervically, and 497 controls. Most important, women who were lactating at the time of IUD insertion were 10 times as likely to have had a uterine perforation as women with at least 1 live birth but who were not lactating at the time of insertion. An incarcerated IUD resulting in a difficult removal was 2.3 times as likely among women lactating at the time of insertion compared to women not lactating at the time of insertion. The likelihood of both uterine perforation and uterine incarceration were unchanged regardless of the type of IUD used.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1983        PMID: 6823347

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0029-7844            Impact factor:   7.661


  18 in total

1.  Misplaced intrauterine contraceptive devices: common errors; uncommon complications.

Authors:  Vishwas Johri; Kailash C Vyas
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2013-05-01

2.  Mislocated extrauterine intrauterine devices: Diagnosis and surgical management.

Authors:  Mustafa Kaplanoğlu; Mehmet Bülbül; Tuncay Yüce; Dilek Kaplanoğlu; Meral Aban
Journal:  J Turk Ger Gynecol Assoc       Date:  2015-06-01

3.  Nonpalpable intrauterine device threads: Is it a cause for worry?

Authors:  S K Kathpalia; M K Singh; D S Grewal
Journal:  Med J Armed Forces India       Date:  2015-07-21

4.  Intrauterine contraceptive device appendicitis: a case report.

Authors:  Hao-Ming Chang; Teng-Wei Chen; Chung-Bao Hsieh; Chung-Jueng Chen; Jyh-Cherng Yu; Yao-Chi Liu; Kuo-Liang Shen; De-Chuan Chan
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2005-09-14       Impact factor: 5.742

5.  Uterine perforation with the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device: analysis of reports from four national pharmacovigilance centres.

Authors:  Kees van Grootheest; Bernhardt Sachs; Mira Harrison-Woolrych; Pia Caduff-Janosa; Eugène van Puijenbroek
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2011-01-01       Impact factor: 5.606

6.  Urinary complications of migrated intrauterine contraceptive device.

Authors:  Ahmed S El-Hefnawy; Ahmed R El-Nahas; Yaser Osman; Mahmoud A Bazeed
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2007-07-14

7.  Laparoscopic removal of a perforated intrauterine device from the perirectal fat.

Authors:  P D Silva; K M Larson
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2000 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 2.172

8.  Laparoscopic removal of an intrauterine device following colon perforation.

Authors:  Arie Bitterman; Oleg Lefel; Yakir Segev; Ofer Lavie
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2010 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 2.172

9.  Role of the levonorgestrel intrauterine system in effective contraception.

Authors:  Abdelhamid M Attia; Magdy M Ibrahim; Ahmed M Abou-Setta
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2013-08-09       Impact factor: 2.711

10.  Colonoscopic retrieval of migrated copper-T.

Authors:  Laleng M Darlong; Subrat Panda; Noor Topno; Ranendra Hajong
Journal:  J Minim Access Surg       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 1.407

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.