2002
DOI: 10.1080/01443610211125
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Ureteric calculus around an intrauterine contraceptive device

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2005
2005
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…3,4,5 Due to the asymptomatic nature of the perforation, the true incidence of the uterus perforation by an IUD is most likely higher than reported. 6 The exact mechanism that causes uterine perforation and migration of the IUD is not entirely known.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 67%
“…3,4,5 Due to the asymptomatic nature of the perforation, the true incidence of the uterus perforation by an IUD is most likely higher than reported. 6 The exact mechanism that causes uterine perforation and migration of the IUD is not entirely known.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 67%
“…Perforation of the uterus by an IUD is reported to occur following 0.2-9.6 per 1000 insertions; however fewer than 2% involve the bladder. 1 Intravesical migration and secondary stone formation has been reported with other IUDs but to our knowledge this is the first reported case of intravesical migration of a LNG-IUS.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 81%
“…In our cases, the IUD embedded in the ureter was removed by ureteroscopy, the other two cases was removed by laparoscope. A review revealed that 93% of the reported cases who had surgery attempted laparoscopically [13], but cases of both abdominal and pelvic organ perforations have the open surgery rate of 57.1% [14]. In conclusion, minimally-invasive methods, such as laparoscopy or endoscopy, are standard approach for removal of migrated IUD.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%