ArticleRadiology case reports2021
Nexplanon removal from intramuscular implantation in biceps: case report.
Article in Radiology case reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Fluoroscopy-guided removal of a migrated non-palpable implanon adherent to the ulnar nerve: a case report.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Three Concurrent Nonpalpable Nexplanon Implants in the Upper Arms Following Presumed Failed Insertions: A Case Report.Case reports in obstetrics and gynecology · 2026Article
- Surgeon Referral for Extraction of Inadvertent Deep and Nonpalpable Contraceptive Implants That Place Major Peripheral Nerves at Risk: A Systematic Review of Case Reports and Case Series.The archives of bone and joint surgery · 2026Review
- Complication of Nexplanon contraceptive implant requiring intramuscular removal from biceps: A Case Report.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2025Article
- Infective Endocarditis in Hypertrophic Obstructive Cardiomyopathy After Etonogestrel Implant Removal.Cureus · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Contraceptive implant devices are relatively safe devices, but complications arise when implants become nonpalpable, and cannot be safely removed. In this case report, we describe the location of an implant in the subfascial plane of the upper arm, the diagnostic imaging findings we encountered during the workup, and the procedure necessary to remove it. We demonstrated that if the device is in close proximity to the fascia, it may be difficult to distinguish from the fascia on magnetic resonance imaging. Nonetheless, fluoroscopy and ultrasound easily distinguished the device from the surrounding tissue and allowed localization intraoperatively.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.