Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Elective surgical removal of migrated intrauterine contraceptive devices from within the peritoneal cavity: a comparison between open and laparoscopic removal.
JSLS 2012 Apr-Jun; 16(2):236-41JSLS

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Intrauterine contraceptive devices (IUCDs) comprise the most popular form of reversible contraception. Uterine perforation is a rare but potentially serious complication associated with their use. We examined all reported cases of elective surgical removal of peritoneally migrated IUCDs, to compare laparoscopic and open approaches, and to identify beneficial surgical techniques.

DATABASE

MEDLINE and Embase were searched using the following medical subject heading terms: (IUCD or IUD or IUS or intrauterine device or intrauterine devices, copper or intrauterine devices, medicated) AND (migrated or displaced or foreign-body migration or intrauterine device migration) AND (peritoneal or peritoneal cavity). The Cochrane Library was searched using the terms IUCD, IUD, IUS, and intrauterine device. Additional studies were identified by manually searching the reference lists of the studies found through database search. Studies were included irrespective of language or publication type.

DISCUSSION

We identified 129 cases, reported in 30 studies. In the majority of cases (93.0% [120/129]), surgery was attempted laparoscopically; however 22.5% (27/120) of surgeries were converted to open operations, giving an overall rate of open surgery of 27.9% (36/129). This systematic review supports the use of laparoscopic surgery for elective removal of migrated IUCDs from the peritoneal cavity. With complications rarely reported, it is also likely the procedure could be undertaken in an outpatient setting. The use of intraoperative adjuncts (ie, cystoscopy) and the rate of conversion to open surgery are influenced by the site of the IUCD. Therefore, accurate preoperative localization of the device is advised.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Department of General Surgery, Airedale General Hospital, Steeton, West Yorkshire, UK. Frances_Mosley@yahoo.co.ukNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Comparative Study
Journal Article
Review
Systematic Review

Language

eng

PubMed ID

23477171

Citation

Mosley, Frances R., et al. "Elective Surgical Removal of Migrated Intrauterine Contraceptive Devices From Within the Peritoneal Cavity: a Comparison Between Open and Laparoscopic Removal." JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons, vol. 16, no. 2, 2012, pp. 236-41.
Mosley FR, Shahi N, Kurer MA. Elective surgical removal of migrated intrauterine contraceptive devices from within the peritoneal cavity: a comparison between open and laparoscopic removal. JSLS. 2012;16(2):236-41.
Mosley, F. R., Shahi, N., & Kurer, M. A. (2012). Elective surgical removal of migrated intrauterine contraceptive devices from within the peritoneal cavity: a comparison between open and laparoscopic removal. JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons, 16(2), pp. 236-41.
Mosley FR, Shahi N, Kurer MA. Elective Surgical Removal of Migrated Intrauterine Contraceptive Devices From Within the Peritoneal Cavity: a Comparison Between Open and Laparoscopic Removal. JSLS. 2012;16(2):236-41. PubMed PMID: 23477171.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Elective surgical removal of migrated intrauterine contraceptive devices from within the peritoneal cavity: a comparison between open and laparoscopic removal. AU - Mosley,Frances R, AU - Shahi,Navneel, AU - Kurer,Mohamed A, PY - 2013/3/13/entrez PY - 2013/3/13/pubmed PY - 2013/4/3/medline SP - 236 EP - 41 JF - JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons JO - JSLS VL - 16 IS - 2 N2 - BACKGROUND: Intrauterine contraceptive devices (IUCDs) comprise the most popular form of reversible contraception. Uterine perforation is a rare but potentially serious complication associated with their use. We examined all reported cases of elective surgical removal of peritoneally migrated IUCDs, to compare laparoscopic and open approaches, and to identify beneficial surgical techniques. DATABASE: MEDLINE and Embase were searched using the following medical subject heading terms: (IUCD or IUD or IUS or intrauterine device or intrauterine devices, copper or intrauterine devices, medicated) AND (migrated or displaced or foreign-body migration or intrauterine device migration) AND (peritoneal or peritoneal cavity). The Cochrane Library was searched using the terms IUCD, IUD, IUS, and intrauterine device. Additional studies were identified by manually searching the reference lists of the studies found through database search. Studies were included irrespective of language or publication type. DISCUSSION: We identified 129 cases, reported in 30 studies. In the majority of cases (93.0% [120/129]), surgery was attempted laparoscopically; however 22.5% (27/120) of surgeries were converted to open operations, giving an overall rate of open surgery of 27.9% (36/129). This systematic review supports the use of laparoscopic surgery for elective removal of migrated IUCDs from the peritoneal cavity. With complications rarely reported, it is also likely the procedure could be undertaken in an outpatient setting. The use of intraoperative adjuncts (ie, cystoscopy) and the rate of conversion to open surgery are influenced by the site of the IUCD. Therefore, accurate preoperative localization of the device is advised. SN - 1086-8089 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/23477171/Elective_surgical_removal_of_migrated_intrauterine_contraceptive_devices_from_within_the_peritoneal_cavity:_a_comparison_between_open_and_laparoscopic_removal_ L2 - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmid/23477171/ DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -