Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

The incarcerated intrauterine device.

M Gunaratne

    The Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology
    |November 1, 1978
    PubMed
    Summary
    This summary is machine-generated.

    Embedded intrauterine devices (IUDs) present removal challenges. Abdominal surgery is a safer alternative to difficult vaginal removal attempts for incarcerated IUDs.

    Related Concept Videos

    You might also read

    Related Articles

    Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

    Sort by
    Same author

    Sexual abuse of illegally adopted children.

    The Ceylon medical journal·1997
    Same author

    Hyperprolactinaemia and reproductive failure.

    The Ceylon medical journal·1993
    Same author

    The epidemiology of infertility 1976-1988.

    The Ceylon medical journal·1992
    Same author

    Accommodation defects of the intrauterine contraceptive device.

    East African medical journal·1980
    Same author

    The epidemiology of infertility: a selected clinic study.

    The Ceylon medical journal·1979
    Same author

    CU-T 200--the bioactive IUD: a comparison with other devices.

    The Ceylon medical journal·1977

    Area of Science:

    • Gynecology
    • Minimally Invasive Surgery
    • Reproductive Health

    Background:

    • Intrauterine devices (IUDs) are common contraceptives.
    • IUDs can become embedded or incarcerated, complicating removal.
    • Difficult IUD removal poses risks to patients.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To evaluate the safety and efficacy of surgical intervention for incarcerated IUDs.
    • To compare abdominal versus vaginal approaches for difficult IUD removal.
    • To assess the feasibility of concurrent procedures during IUD removal.

    Main Methods:

    • A trial comparing surgical approaches for incarcerated IUDs.
    • Utilized abdominal surgery for cases of complete IUD embedding.
    • Documented patient characteristics and procedural outcomes.

    Related Experiment Videos

    Main Results:

    • Abdominal approach demonstrated superiority for incarcerated IUD removal.
    • Vaginal removal with extensive instrumentation is hazardous.
    • Concomitant tubal ligation is feasible in many cases with incarcerated IUDs.

    Conclusions:

    • Surgical intervention, specifically abdominal surgery, is recommended for incarcerated IUDs.
    • Avoid aggressive vaginal removal techniques.
    • Concurrent tubal ligation can be safely performed during abdominal IUD removal.