Intraperitoneal migration of an intrauterine device.

Intrauterine devices (IUD) are one of the most common contraceptive methods worldwide. Although adverse events from their use are low, their insertion can cause some complications. Intraperitoneal migration of IUD after transuterine perforation remains one of the most serious events due to the ri...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Batna Journal of Medical Sciences
Main Authors: Nabila FEGHOUL, Zakaria Seoudi, Mourad Derguini, Hafida Bendaoud
Format: Article
Language:Arabic
Published: Algerian Society of Clinical & Oncological Pharmacy 2024-03-01
Subjects:
Online Access:https://batnajms.net/wp-content/uploads/Archives/2024/1/BJMS_Feghoul.pdf
_version_ 1848652443030650880
author Nabila FEGHOUL
Zakaria Seoudi
Mourad Derguini
Hafida Bendaoud
author_facet Nabila FEGHOUL
Zakaria Seoudi
Mourad Derguini
Hafida Bendaoud
author_sort Nabila FEGHOUL
collection DOAJ
container_title Batna Journal of Medical Sciences
description Intrauterine devices (IUD) are one of the most common contraceptive methods worldwide. Although adverse events from their use are low, their insertion can cause some complications. Intraperitoneal migration of IUD after transuterine perforation remains one of the most serious events due to the risks of injury to intraperitoneal organs and secondary complications. Although the clinical diagnosis of such a scenario must be recognized in time, it is not always obvious. In most cases, patients do not express any symptoms. “Missing strings” of the IUD in any patient using this type of contraceptive is generally the first warning sign and further investigation is necessary to locate them. When intraperitoneal migration is diagnosed. It should be kept in mind that most devices can and should be removed even if they are asymptomatic. In this observation we report the case of a 31year old patient, who consulted an emergency department for pelvic pain and tenderness of the left iliac fossa in the days following insertion of an IUD. Following clinical and ultrasound examination, the diagnosis of intraperitoneal migration of the IUD was accepted and the device removed by laparoscopic approach.
format Article
id doaj-d2e00fae2c7b431ebd3114e61fd7287e
institution Directory of Open Access Journals
issn 2437-0665
language Arabic
publishDate 2024-03-01
publisher Algerian Society of Clinical & Oncological Pharmacy
record_format Article
spelling doaj-d2e00fae2c7b431ebd3114e61fd7287e2025-11-02T22:39:47ZaraAlgerian Society of Clinical & Oncological PharmacyBatna Journal of Medical Sciences2437-06652024-03-0111110.48087/BJMScr.2024.11110Intraperitoneal migration of an intrauterine device.Nabila FEGHOUL0Zakaria Seoudi1Mourad Derguini2Hafida Bendaoud3Service de Chirurgie Gynécologique - EPH de Kouba - Université d’Alger 1. AlgérieService de Chirurgie Générale CHU Douéra - Université de Blida 1. AlgérieService de Chirurgie Gynécologique - EPH de Kouba - Université d’Alger 1. AlgérieService de Chirurgie Gynécologique - EPH de Kouba - Université d’Alger 1. AlgérieIntrauterine devices (IUD) are one of the most common contraceptive methods worldwide. Although adverse events from their use are low, their insertion can cause some complications. Intraperitoneal migration of IUD after transuterine perforation remains one of the most serious events due to the risks of injury to intraperitoneal organs and secondary complications. Although the clinical diagnosis of such a scenario must be recognized in time, it is not always obvious. In most cases, patients do not express any symptoms. “Missing strings” of the IUD in any patient using this type of contraceptive is generally the first warning sign and further investigation is necessary to locate them. When intraperitoneal migration is diagnosed. It should be kept in mind that most devices can and should be removed even if they are asymptomatic. In this observation we report the case of a 31year old patient, who consulted an emergency department for pelvic pain and tenderness of the left iliac fossa in the days following insertion of an IUD. Following clinical and ultrasound examination, the diagnosis of intraperitoneal migration of the IUD was accepted and the device removed by laparoscopic approach.https://batnajms.net/wp-content/uploads/Archives/2024/1/BJMS_Feghoul.pdfintrauterine contraceptive devicecomplications intrauterine devicemigrationintraperitoneallaparoscopy
spellingShingle Nabila FEGHOUL
Zakaria Seoudi
Mourad Derguini
Hafida Bendaoud
Intraperitoneal migration of an intrauterine device.
intrauterine contraceptive device
complications intrauterine device
migration
intraperitoneal
laparoscopy
title Intraperitoneal migration of an intrauterine device.
title_full Intraperitoneal migration of an intrauterine device.
title_fullStr Intraperitoneal migration of an intrauterine device.
title_full_unstemmed Intraperitoneal migration of an intrauterine device.
title_short Intraperitoneal migration of an intrauterine device.
title_sort intraperitoneal migration of an intrauterine device
topic intrauterine contraceptive device
complications intrauterine device
migration
intraperitoneal
laparoscopy
url https://batnajms.net/wp-content/uploads/Archives/2024/1/BJMS_Feghoul.pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT nabilafeghoul intraperitonealmigrationofanintrauterinedevice
AT zakariaseoudi intraperitonealmigrationofanintrauterinedevice
AT mouradderguini intraperitonealmigrationofanintrauterinedevice
AT hafidabendaoud intraperitonealmigrationofanintrauterinedevice