Migration of Intra-Uterine Devices

References

• Trussell J. Contraceptive failure in the United States. Contraception. 2011;83(5):397–404. doi:10.1016/J.CONTRACEPTION.2011.01.021
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• World Contraceptive Use. Population division; 2023. Available from: https://www.un.org/development/desa/pd/data/world-contraceptive-use. Accessed March 13,2024.
   Google Scholar
• Adeyemi-Fowode OA, Bercaw-Pratt JL. Intrauterine devices: effective contraception with noncontraceptive benefits for adolescents. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2019;32(5S):S2–S6. doi:10.1016/J.JPAG.2019.07.001
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mestad R, Secura G, Allsworth JE, Madden T, Zhao Q, Peipert JF. Acceptance of long-acting reversible contraceptive methods by adolescent participants in the contraceptive CHOICE project. Contraception. 2011;84(5):493–498. doi:10.1016/J.CONTRACEPTION.2011.03.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heinemann K, Reed S, Moehner S, Do Minh T. Risk of uterine perforation with levonorgestrel-releasing and copper intrauterine devices in the European active surveillance study on intrauterine devices. Contraception. 2015;91(4):274–279. doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2015.01.007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kho KA, Dina MPH. Perforated intraperitoneal intrauterine contraceptive devices: diagnosis, management and clinical outcomes HHS public access. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2014;21(4):596–601. doi:10.1016/j.jmig.2013.12.123
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62(10):e1–e34. doi:10.1016/J.JCLINEPI.2009.06.006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baker CC, Creinin MD. Long-acting reversible contraception. Obstetrics Gynecol. 2022;140(5):883–897. doi:10.1097/AOG.0000000000004967
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keenahan L, Bercaw-Pratt JL, Adeyemi O, Hakim J, Sangi-Haghpeykar H, Dietrich JE. Rates of intrauterine device expulsion among adolescents and young women. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2021;34(3):362–365. doi:10.1016/J.JPAG.2020.11.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simonatto P, Bahamondes MV, Fernandes A, Silveira C, Bahamondes L. Comparison of two cohorts of women who expulsed either a copper-intrauterine device or a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system. J Obstetrics Gynaecol Res. 2016;42(5):554–559. doi:10.1111/JOG.12939
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Schoubroeck D, T VDB, Ameye L, et al. Pain and bleeding pattern related to levonorgestrel intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) insertion. Eur J Obstetrics Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2013;171(1):154–156. doi:10.1016/J.EJOGRB.2013.08.029
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caliskan E, Öztürk N, Bö D, Dilbaz S. Analysis of risk factors associated with uterine perforation by intrauterine devices. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2003;8(3):150–155. doi:10.1080/EJC.8.3.150.155
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barnett C, Moehner S, Do Minh T, Heinemann K. Perforation risk and intra-uterine devices: results of the EURAS-IUD 5-year extension study. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2017;22(6):424–428. doi:10.1080/13625187.2017.1412427
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harrison-Woolrych M, Ashton J, Coulter D. Uterine perforation on intrauterine device insertion: is the incidence higher than previously reported? Contraception. 2003;67(1):53–56. doi:10.1016/S0010-7824(02)00417-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Agacayak E, Tunc SY, Icen MS, et al. Evaluation of predisposing factors, diagnostic and treatment methods in patients with translocation of intrauterine devices. J Obstetrics Gynaecol Res. 2015;41(5):735–741. doi:10.1111/JOG.12620
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gatz JL, Armstrong MA, Postlethwaite D, et al. Association between intrauterine device type and risk of perforation and device expulsion: results from the association of perforation and expulsion of intrauterine device study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2022;227(1):57.e1–57.e13. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2022.03.062
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rowlands S, Oloto E, Horwell DH. Intrauterine devices and risk of uterine perforation: current perspectives. Open Access J Contracept. 2016;7:19. doi:10.2147/OAJC.S85546
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Zakin D, Stern WZ, Rosenblatt R. Complete and partial uterine perforation and embedding following insertion of intrauterine devices. I. Classification, complications, mechanism, incidence, and missing string. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 1981;36(7):335–353. doi:10.1097/00006254-198107000-00001
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Abbas A, Ali MK, Abdalmageed OS, Yosef AH, Abdelkader AM, Shaaban OM. Evaluation of a novel uterine sound sparing approach for copper intrauterine device insertion. Fertil Steril. 2017;108(3):e123. doi:10.1016/J.FERTNSTERT.2017.07.376
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maged AM, Nada AM, Abdelwahab H, et al. The value of ultrasound guidance during IUD insertion in women with RVF uterus: a randomized controlled trial. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod. 2021;50(4):101875. doi:10.1016/J.JOGOH.2020.101875
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nowitzki KM, Hoimes ML, Chen B, Zheng LZ, Kim YH. Ultrasonography of intrauterine devices. Ultrasonography. 2015;34(3):183. doi:10.14366/USG.15010
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Schoubroeck D, Van Den Bosch T, Mortelman P, Timmerman D. Picture of the Month: sonographic determination of the position of a levonorgestrel intrauterine device. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2009;33(1):121–124. doi:10.1002/UOG.6288
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boortz HE, Margolis DJA, Ragavendra N, Patel MK, Kadell BM. Migration of intrauterine devices: radiologic findings and implications for patient care. Radiographics. 2012;32(2):335–352. doi:10.1148/RG.322115068
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adoni A, Ben Chetrit A. The management of intrauterine devices following uterine perforation. Contraception. 1991;43(1):77–81. doi:10.1016/0010-7824(91)90128-3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tabatabaei F, Masoumzadeh M. Dislocated intrauterine devices: clinical presentations, diagnosis and management. Eur J Contra. 2021;26(2):160–166. doi:10.1080/13625187.2021.1874337
   Google Scholar
• Nelson A, Massoudi MPHN. New developments in intrauterine device use: focus on the US. Open Access J Contracept. 2016;7:127. doi:10.2147/OAJC.S85755
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mechanism of action, safety and efficacy of intrauterine devices: report of a WHO Scientific Group; 1986. Available from: https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/38182.Accessed December 21, 2022.
   Google Scholar
• Gill RS, Mok D, Hudson M, Shi X, Birch DW, Karmali S. Laparoscopic removal of an intra-abdominal intrauterine device: case and systematic review. Contraception. 2012;85(1):15–18. doi:10.1016/J.CONTRACEPTION.2011.04.015
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ozgun MT, Batukan C, Serin IS, Ozcelik B, Basbug M, Dolanbay M. Surgical management of intra-abdominal mislocated intrauterine devices. Contraception. 2007;75(2):96–100. doi:10.1016/J.CONTRACEPTION.2006.09.011
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization. Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use. MDPI; 2009. 268.
   Google Scholar
• Goldstuck ND, Wildemeersch D. Role of uterine forces in intrauterine device embedment, perforation, and expulsion. Int J Womens Health. 2014;6(1):735–744. doi:10.2147/IJWH.S63167
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Curtis KM, Tepper NK, Jatlaoui TC, et al. U.S. medical eligibility criteria for contraceptive use, 2016. MMWR Recommendations Rep. 2020;65(3):1–104. doi:10.15585/MMWR.RR6503A1
   Google Scholar
• Mascilini F, Moro F, De Leo R, Scambia G, Fagotti A, Testa AC. Intraoperative ultrasound assistance for surgical removal of lost intrauterine device. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2019;53(5):705–706. doi:10.1002/UOG.19167
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wright JD. NewYork-presbyterian hospital New York, NY patient preference for intrauterine device follow-up. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2022;69:1109–1125. doi:10.1016/j.ajog
   Google Scholar
• Ansari AS, Tullius TG, Ross JR. The role of ultrasound in the assessment of intrauterine device complications. Donald School J Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2012;6(3):318–326. doi:10.5005/jp-journals-10009-1255
   Google Scholar
• Bozkurt M, Ender Yumru A, Coskun EI, Ondes B. Ebru inci coskun, banu öndes. laparoscopic management of a translocated intrauterine device embedded in the gastric serosa. J Pak Med Assoc. 2011;61(10):1020–1022.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsafrir A, Plotkin V. One intrauterine device lost, two found. Fertil Steril. 2008;90(1):185. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.09.065
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Toumi O, Ammar H, Ghdira A, et al. Pelvic abscess complicating sigmoid colon perforation by migrating intrauterine device: a case report and review of the literature. Int J Surg Case Rep. 2018;42:60–63. doi:10.1016/J.IJSCR.2017.10.038
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Istanbulluoglu MO, Ozcimen EE, Ozturk B, Uckuyu A, Cicek T, Gonen M. Bladder perforation related to intrauterine device. J Chin Med Assoc. 2008;71(4):207–209. doi:10.1016/S1726-4901(08)70105-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar