Role of uterine forces in intrauterine device embedment, perforation, and expulsion

References

• WildemeerschDIUD/IUS designs that do not fit may significantly contribute to early discontinuation – a commentaryEur J Contracept Reprod Health Care20111613514121281098
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HassonHMClinical studies of the Wing Sound II metrology deviceZatuchniGIGoldsmithASciarraJJIntrauterine Contraception: Advances and Future ProspectsPhiladelphia, PA, USAHarper and Row1984126141
   Google Scholar
• KurzKHCavimeter uterine measurements and IUD clinical correlationZatuchniGIGoldsmithASciarraJJIntrauterine Contraception: Advances and Future ProspectsPhiladelphia, PA, USAHarper and Row1984142162
   Google Scholar
• KamalIHefnawiFGhonheimMTalantMAbdallaMDimensional and architectural disproportion between the intrauterine device and the uterine cavity: a cause of bleedingFertil Steril1971225145215164979
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• GoldstuckNAssessment of uterine cavity size and shape: a systematic review addressing relevance to intrauterine procedures and eventsAfr J Reprod Health201216129138
   Google Scholar
• GoldstuckNDThe relationship of IUD dimensions to event ratesContracept Deliv Syst1982310310512338163
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• TatumHJConnellEBIntrauterine devicesFilshieMGuillebaudJContraception: Science and PracticeLondon, UKButterworths1989
   Google Scholar
• Van HoudenhovenKvan KaamKJAFvan GrootheestACSalemansTHBDunselmanGAJUterine perforation in women using a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine systemContraception20067325726016472566
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HeartwellSFSchlesselmanSRisk of perforation among users of intrauterine devicesObstet Gynecol19836131366823347
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• GoldstuckNDHollowayGIUD insertion forces: effects of recent childbirth and lactationAdv Contracept198841591643213673
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• GoldstuckNDInsertion forces with intrauterine devices: implications for uterine perforationEur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol1987253153233653495
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• AnthonyGSFisherJCouttsJRCalderAAForces required for surgical dilatation of the pregnant and non-pregnant human cervixBr J Obstet Gynaecol1982899139167171498
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• NicolaidesKHWelchCCMcPhersonMBJohnsonIRFilshieGMLamicel: a new technique for cervical dilatation before first trimester abortionBr J Obstet Gynaecol1983904754796849849
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• MilsomIAnderschBIntrauterine pressure and serum ibuprofen: observations after oral administration of 400 mg ibuprofen to a patient with primary dysmenorrhoeaEur J Clin Pharmacol1985294434464092725
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LiedmanRSkillernLJamesIMcLeodAGrantLAkerlundMValidation of a test model of induced dysmenorrhoeaActa Obstet Gynecol Scand20068545145716612708
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BullettiCde ZieglerDPolliVDiotalleviLDel FerroEFlamigniCUterine contractility during the menstrual cycleHum Reprod200015Suppl 1818910928421
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CzekanowskiRDie Abhaengigkeit von Volumen un Druck in der nicht schwangeren menschlichen. [In-vitro studies into interdependence of volume and pressure in non-pregnant human uterus]Zentralbl Gynakol1980102129137 German7211025
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• TejujaSMalkaniPKClinical significance of correlation between size of the uterine cavity and IUCD: a planimeter hysterogram techniqueAm J Obstet Gynecol19691056206275824884
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• IsmailAAAnwarMYKeskSMAzaySMGaweeshSToppozadaMKUterine geometry by Wing sound and hysterography versus direct measurementsAdv Contracept198732372433673699
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• SharmaAKText Book of Vector CalculusNew Delhi, IndiaDiscovery Publishing House2006
   Google Scholar
• D’SouzaREBoundsWGuillebaudJComparative trial of the force required for, and pain of, removing GyneFix® versus Gyne-T380S® following randomised insertionJ Fam Plann Reprod Health Care200329293112681034
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• KurzKHRole of retention in avoiding expulsion of IUDs- measuring devices for basic researchContracept Deliv Syst1982310711612338164
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• GoldstuckNDIUD fracture mechanismContraception20148932824418701
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WilsonSTanGBaylsonMScreiberCControversies in family planning: how to manage a fractured IUDContraception20138859960324028753
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• GoldstuckNDBowing forces with IUD inserters in vitro: reference to difficult IUD insertionsClin Reprod Fertil198751731763450375
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• GiancoliDCPhysics6th edUpper Saddle River, NJ, USAPearson Prentice Hall2012
   Google Scholar
• GoldstuckNDHofmeyrGJSonnendeckerEWButchartAIn vitro study of fracture forces associated with the Copper T, Nova T and MLCu 250/375 intrauterine devicesContraception1990415835892361369
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HorbeltDVRobertsDKAndersonHWStudies in translocation: Dalkon shield insertion, perforation and migrationJ Kans Med Soc197980323326572391
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• CustoGSaittoCCerzaSCosmiEVIntrauterine rupture of a Multiload Cu 250 intrauterine device: report of a caseAdv Contracept198842172203071110
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• SinhaPPradhanADiabYExpulsion of part of a spontaneously broken IUDJ Obstet Gynaecol20042483783815763814
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• JindalSSharmaSSIkorniASpontaneous breakage and expulsion of a stem fragment of levonorgestrel intrauterine system (Mirena) following duplicate insertionArch Gynecol Obstet2009279959718949478
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BraaksmaJTJanssensJEskersTKABHeinPRAccurate pressure recording in the non-pregnant human uterus. A comparison of open and closed tip cathetersEur J Obstet Gynaecol19716195206
   Google Scholar
• Macedo-CostaLFPinto-DantasCADarzeEDe SouzaOThe effect of the IUD on the intrauterine pressure of the human uterusInt J Gynecol Obstet19719192202
   Google Scholar
• ZakinDSternWZRosenblattRComplete and partial uterine perforation and embedding following insertion of intrauterine devices. I. Classification, complications, mechanism, incidence and missing stringObstet Gynecol Surv1981363353537029368
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• CaliskanEOzturkBDilbazODilbazSAnalysis of risk factors associated with intrauterine perforation by intrauterine devicesEur J Contracept Reprod Health Care2003815015514667326
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• GoldstuckNDA comparison of the initial pain response following insertion of the Copper 7 and combined Multiload Copper 250 IUDsContracept Deliv Syst1982229530112336990
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• WildermeerschDJanssensDAndradeAThe Femilis® LNG-IUS: contraceptive performance – an interim analysisEur J Contracept Reprod Health Care20091410311019340705
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• JohnsonNBromhamDREffect of cervical traction with a tenaculum on the uterocervical angleBr J Obstet Gynaecol1991983093122021570
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• EkeNOkpaniAOExtrauterine translocated contraceptive device: a presentation of five cases and revisit of the enigmatic issues of iatrogenic perforation and migrationAfr J Reprod Health2003711712315055154
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Harrison-WoolrychMAshtonJCoulterDUterine perforation on intrauterine device insertion: is the incidence higher than previously reportedContraception200367535612521659
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BenacerrafBRShippTDBromleyBThree-dimensional ultrasound detection of abnormally located intrauterine contraceptive devices which are the source of pelvic pain and abnormal bleedingUltrasound Obstet Gynecol20093411011519565532
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flexi-T. [homepage on the Internet] Prescribing informationProsan International BVArnhem, the Netherlands2005 Available from http://www.trimedic-inc.com/flexi-t_iud_advantage.htmlAccessed July 8, 2014
   Google Scholar
• WildemeerschDPettAJandiSHasskampTRowePVrijensMPrecision intrauterine contraception may significantly increase continuation of use: a review of long-term clinical experience with frameless copper-releasing intrauterine contraception devicesInt J Womens Health2013521522523658502
   PubMedGoogle Scholar