BACKGROUND: The intrauterine device is one of the effective, safe, convenient, economical, and reversible contraceptive methods. Although its contraceptive effect is definite, some female patients may experience complications such as expulsion, bleeding, and pregnancy with the device in place. Rectal perforation is one of the rare and serious complications, which can lead to complications such as abdominal infection and intestinal adhesions, severely affecting the quality of life of patients.
METHODS: A 34-year-old female was sent to the Department of Gastroenterology with noticeable left lower quadrant abdominal pain. She had presented with abdominal discomfort and anal tenesmus 1 year earlier. Two months ago, her abdominal pain had gradually worsened and she was presented to our hospital.
METHODS: Investigations, including colonoscopy and computed tomography scan, had revealed an intrauterine device migrated and perforated into the rectum.
RESULTS: The patient underwent successful colonoscopic removal of the intrauterine device. She recovered well after the treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: This case proves that endoscopic therapy can be considered the preferred method for removing intrauterine devices displaced into the digestive tract lumen.

This article aims to report the comprehensive and up-to-date analysis and evidence of the insertion rate, expulsion rate, removal rate, and utilization rate of immediate placement of intrauterine devices (IUDs) versus delayed placement after artificial abortion. PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science, CNKI, and Wanfang databases were comprehensively searched up to January 12, 2024 for studies that compared immediate versus delayed insertion of IUDs after abortion. The evaluation metrics included the number of IUD insertion after surgical or medical abortions, the frequency of expulsion and removal at 6 months or 1 year, the number of continued usage, pain intensity scores, the number of infections, the duration of bleeding, and instances of uterine perforation during or after IUD insertion. Ten randomized controlled articles were eligible, comprising 11 research projects, of which 3 projects involved the placement of an IUD after surgical abortion, and 8 projects involved the placement of an IUD after medical abortion. This included 2025 patients (977 in the immediate insertion group and 1,048 in the delayed insertion group). We summarized all the extracted evidence. The meta-analysis results indicated that for post-surgical abortions, the immediate insertion group exhibited a higher IUD placement rate than the delayed insertion group. After medical abortions, the immediate insertion group showed higher rates of IUD placement, utilization, and expulsion at 6 months or 1 year. The two groups showed no statistically significant differences in the removal rate, post-insertion infection rate, pain scores during insertion, and days of bleeding during the follow-up period. Compared to delayed placement, immediate insertion of IUDs can not only increase the usage rate at 6 months or 1 year but also enhance the placement rate.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and pregnancy outcomes of intrauterine balloon and intrauterine contraceptive devices in the prevention of adhesion reformation following hysteroscopic adhesiolysis in infertile women with moderate to severe intrauterine adhesion.
METHODS: A prospective, randomized, controlled trial study.
METHODS: A tertiary university hospital.
METHODS: A total of 130 patients with moderate (American Fertility Society [AFS] score of 5-8) and severe (AFS score of 9-12) intrauterine adhesions were recruited.
METHODS: 86 patients were evenly allocated to group treated with an IUD for 1 month and group treated with an IUD for 2 months. 44 patients were allocated to group treated with a Foley catheter balloon.(IUD: Yuangong IUD).
RESULTS: The primary outcome measures were the AFS score, endometrial thickness, and pregnancy outcome. After hysteroscopy, the AFS score was significantly decreased(P<0.05), whereas endometrial thickness was significantly increased across the three groups(P<0.001). Notably, the decline in the AFS score in the balloon group was greater than that in the IUD-1-month group and IUD-2-month group(P<0.01), with no significant difference between the IUD groups(P = 0.298). Lastly, In addition, the extent of the increase in endometrial thickness(P = 0.502) and the pregnancy outcomes(P = 0.803) in the three groups were not significantly different.
CONCLUSIONS: Inserting a balloon or placing an IUD for one or two months can effectively lower the risk of adhesion recurrence and restore the shape of the uterine cavity. While the therapeutic effect of the balloon was superior to that of the IUD, no significant differences were observed in the one-month and two-month IUD groups.
BACKGROUND: This research was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ( http://www.chictr.org.cn/enIndex.aspx ); Clinical trial registry identification number: ChiCTR-IOR-17,011,943 ( http://www.chictr.org.cn/showprojen.aspx?proj=17979 ). Date of trial registration: July 11, 2017.

OBJECTIVE: The majority of intrauterine devices (IUDs) inserted in China are tailless, requiring intrauterine manipulations for removal and causing pain. This study aimed to investigate the analgesic efficacy of lidocaine injection into a novel disposable injectable cervical dilator for IUD removal procedures.
METHODS: A double-blinded, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial was conducted with women aged 18-65 years old requesting outpatient IUD removal. The study randomly assigned participants to either lidocaine (injecting 5 ml of 2% lidocaine into the injectable cervical dilator) or placebo (injecting 5 ml of normal saline into the device) group. All participants received a standardized paracervical block. The primary outcome was pain reported during IUD removal on a 100 mm Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Intention-to-treat were conducted to evaluate the analgesic effectiveness of injecting lidocaine into the injectable cervical dilators.
RESULTS: We enrolled seventy-four eligible participants (37 in lidocaine group and 37 in placebo group). The results showed that the median intraoperative VAS score in the lidocaine group was lower than the placebo group (30.0 mm [IQR 20.0-46.0, n = 37] vs 46.0 mm [IQR 30.0-55.0, n = 37], p = 0.01. In subgroup analyses, among participants with IUD removal and without uterine manipulation and additional procedures, there was no statistically significant disparity observed in intraoperative VAS scores between the lidocaine and placebo group (15.0 mm [IQR 10.0-27.5, n = 8] vs 20.0 mm [IQR 20.0-40.0, n = 6]), p = 0.28). Among participants with an IUD removal necessitating intrauterine manipulations and without additional procedures, showing lower intraoperative VAS scores in lidocaine group (25.0 mm [IQR 15.0-40.5, n = 17]) compared to placebo group (46.0 mm [IQR 38.5-50.0, n = 23]), p < 0.01. Among participants with additional procedures in addition to IUD removal, there was no statistically significant disparity observed in intraoperative VAS scores between the lidocaine and placebo group (41.0 mm [IQR 32.5-57.5, n = 12] vs 45.0 mm [IQR 22.5-69.0, n = 8]), p = 0.97).
CONCLUSIONS: Injecting lidocaine into the novel disposable injectable cervical dilator for cervix dilation can significantly reduce pain during an IUD removal, particularly in patients necessitating intrauterine manipulations during IUD removal.
CONCLUSIONS: When we have to perform intrauterine manipulations to remove an IUD, surgical pain and narrow cervical canal undoubtedly affect the implementation of the procedure. Injecting lidocaine into the injectable cervical dilator can achieve local anesthesia while dilating the cervix, and might reduce the choice of general anesthesia for IUD removal.

暂无摘要。

BACKGROUND: Uterine perforation is a serious complication of intrauterine contraceptive device (IUD) placement. However, as complete uterine perforation and extrauterine migration may remain asymptomatic, thorough localization of the IUD is important prior to reinsertion.
METHODS: A 33-year-old patient who has had 4 IUD insertions, wherein the location of the first IUD (inserted 14 years ago) was not identified prior to reinsertion and replacement of the subsequent three. She presented to hospital with a 6-month history of abdominal pain. Pelvic ultrasonography (US), radiography, hysteroscopy and laparoscopy examinations confirmed that a retained migrated IUD in the right broad ligament.
METHODS: Uterine perforation, IUD migration to the broad ligament.
METHODS: The patient underwent hysteroscopy and laparoscopy.
RESULTS: Both IUDs were successfully removed without any complications.

暂无摘要。

Office hysteroscopy is a common examination method in gynecological clinics. In most cases, it can only be examined but not treated. Here, we present our specific technique used office hysteroscope to guide intrauterine device (IUD) hook in the removal of deeply embedded IUD which provided direct visualization and sufficient force.

Intrauterine adhesion (IUA) is primarily caused by endometrial injury, and hysteroscopic adhesiolysis is presently the main treatment. However, postoperative recurrence and poor pregnancy outcomes remain intractable. In this study, we aim to assess the effects of different treatments on clinical symptoms and reproductive outcomes in IUA. This retrospective study was conducted in a tertiary university-affiliated women\'s hospital. The study included 1449 consecutive women who desired to have a baby and were diagnosed with IUA through hysteroscopy from January 2016 to December 2021. Patients with IUA underwent hysteroscopic electric resection (E) or cold scissors separation (C), as well as hormone therapy and one or both of the following secondary prevention measures: intrauterine devices (IUD) and hyaluronic acid gel (HA). The pregnancy rate (PR) was significantly higher in the E + IUD + HA (90.23% CI: 85.82, 94.64%) than in other groups (p = 0.000) groups. The rates of full-term birth (p = 0.000) and live birth (p = 0.000) were significantly higher in the E + IUD + HA (67.82% and 68.97%, respectively) and E + HA (62.41% and 63.91%, respectively) groups. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed a significantly higher PR in women who received second-look hysteroscopy (OR 1.571, 95% CI: 1.009-2.224, p = 0.013) and E + IUD + HA (OR 4.772, 95% CI: 2.534-8.987, p = 0.000). Combining hysteroscopic electric resection with IUDs and HA gel could prevent adhesion recurrence and improve postoperative pregnancy and live birth outcomes in IUA. Furthermore, postoperative second-look hysteroscopy may increase the PR and shorten the waiting period.

Laparoscopic adenomyomectomy combined with intraoperative placement of levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device (LNG-IUS) is a novel conservative surgical procedure for adenomyosis. Our study aimed to compare the efficacy of surgery with or without intraoperative placement of LNG-IUS treatment in adenomyosis.
We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of adenomyosis patients who received laparoscopic adenomyomectomy from January 2014 to April 2020, finally including 70 patients undergoing surgery-LNG-IUS as group A and 69 patients undegoing surgery only as group B. Risk factors for three-year relapse were analyzed using Cox\'s multivariate proportional hazard analysis.
Visual analog scale and Mansfield-Voda-Jorgensen Menstrual Bleeding Scale scores of group A at 3, 6, 12, 24, and 36 months were significantly lower than those of group B at the corresponding points (P < .001 for both scales). Individuals in both groups showed statistically significant symptom relief. The recurrence rate in group A was significantly lower than that in group B at 36 months after the surgery (2.94% vs. 32.84%, P < .001). A cox proportional hazard model showed that relapse was significantly associated with coexisting ovarian endometriosis (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 2.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.33-7.02, P = .015). Patients who received surgery-LNG-IUS had a lower risk of recurrence than those with surgery-alone (aHR, 0.07; 95% CI, 0.016-0.31, P < .001).
Conservative surgery with intraoperative placement of LNG-IUS is effective and well-accepted for long-term therapy with a lower recurrence rate for adenomyosis. Coexistent ovarian endometriosis is a major factor for adenomyosis relapse.