ArticleInternational journal of surgery case reports2024
Case report of an unusual finding of intrauterine contraceptive device in the rectum.
Article in International journal of surgery case reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Small bowel necrosis caused by migrated intrauterine device: a rare surgical emergency.International journal of emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Endoscopic Retrieval of Migrated Uterine Device: Case Report.GE Portuguese journal of gastroenterology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIntrauterine contraceptive device (IUCD) is a safe and effective method of contraception. It is however rarely associated with complications. Migration of this device to the rectum is very rare. We report a case of IUCD migrating to the rectum with the history of missing IUCD strings. PRESENTATION OF CASE: A 32-year-old multipara presented 8 weeks following IUCD insertion with missing thread, ultrasound scan done showed a viable pregnancy with IUCD in-situ. Following vaginal examination, IUCD could not be retrieved. Pregnancy was allowed to continue for IUCD to be retrieved at delivery. She presented again about 6 weeks later with IUCD strings protruding through the rectum and was subsequently removed. DISCUSSION: Uterine perforation and migration of IUCD into the pelvic organs is an uncommon but major complication following insertion of the device. The risk of perforation appears to depend on type of device, skill of the operator and position of the uterus. Postpartum insertion, lactation and atrophic uterus also increase risk of perforation.
conclusionperforation and migration of IUCD to the rectum is a rare but possible complication of following insertion of the device. Family planning providers should continue to undergo training and retraining to minimize complications associated with the use of IUCD.
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.