ArticleClinical case reports2022
Far migration of an intrauterine contraceptive device from the uterus to the small bowel.
Article in Clinical case reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Small bowel necrosis caused by migrated intrauterine device: a rare surgical emergency.International journal of emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Intraluminal Appendiceal Migration of an Intrauterine Device Without Appendicitis: A Case Report.The American journal of case reports · 2026Article
- Article
- Intrauterine device (IUD) migration to the fallopian tube: a rare location for a translocated IUD with no visceral injury.Contraception and reproductive medicine · 2024Article
- Pregnancy with Intrauterine Device Perforation: A Case Report.International journal of fertility & sterility · 2023Article
- Far migration of an intrauterine contraceptive device from the uterus to the small bowel.Clinical case reports · 2022Article
- Case report: An intrauterine device hugging the musculus rectus abdominis through the center of a cesarean scar.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A sexually active, asymptomatic 44-year-old presented for Intrauterine device (IUD) removal that had been in place for 13 years. IUD removal was unsuccessful as the strings could not be located. Imaging revealed an extrauterine IUD and at surgical removal of the abdominal IUD a small bowel perforation requiring bowel resection was required. Uterine perforation is a rare complication of IUD use occurring in approximately 1-1.3 in 1000. Risk factors for perforation include provider inexperience, retroverted uterus, immobile uterus, and myometrial defect from a previous cesarean delivery or myomectomy.
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.