ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2024
Ultrasound-guided minimally invasive removal of deep contraceptive implants: outcomes and challenges.
Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- Healthcare Professionals' Self-Perceived Confidence in Contraceptive Implant Localisation and Removal Procedures in Catalonia: A Cross-Sectional Study.Open access journal of contraception · 2026Article
- Contraceptive implant removal: Case report and the role of an ultrasound-trained anesthesiologist in perioperative localization and regional anesthesia.Journal of anesthesia and translational medicine · 2025Article
- Subdermally Placed Implanon Migration Into the Pectoralis Muscle and Its Removal in a Resource-Limited Setup: A Case Report and Brief Literature Review.Clinical case reports · 2025Article
- Localization of a contraceptive implant using a silicon chip-based handheld ultrasound device.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2025Article
- Ultrasound-Guided Hydrodissection with Needle Stabilization: An Innovative Nerve-Sparing Approach to Remove a Contraceptive Implant Causing Ulnar Neuropathy.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Contraceptive arm implants, such as Implanon NXT Methods: In this retrospective observational study, all cases referred to our institution for ultrasound-guided removal of contraceptive implants, from June 2022 to December 2023, were reviewed. Our facility serves as a referral center for handling challenging implants. Twenty-nine women with contraceptive implants were referred for implant removal in this period of time. Thirty implants were sent for removal in total (one patient had a double implant). Data specific to the patients were collected: age and body mass index (BMI). Data specific to the implant were also collected: time since implant insertion (months), history of a previous removal attempt, type of implant (single or double rod), implant palpability, laterality of the implant, supra or subfascial location, success or failure of the ultrasound-guided removal procedure and presence of complications in the post-procedure. Statistical analysis was conducted to determine the relationship between the procedure success rate and these variables, and also between these variables and the supra or subfascial location of the implant. Results: Twenty-six of the 30 implants (86.67%) were successfully removed with this fully ultrasound-guided technique. In cases where the implant could not be removed, there was a higher rate of subfascial implant location (75%), while in cases where the removal was successful, the rate of subfascial implant location was significantly lower at 19.23% (P=0.048). Patients whose implants could be removed had a median BMI of 23.71 kg/m Conclusions: Percutaneous real-time ultrasound-guided implant removal is effective, safe and offers a minimally-invasive alternative to open surgery. The removal of subfascial implants is also feasible but more challenging, leading to a reduction of success rate in this group. These positive outcomes suggest its potential as a standard initial approach for deep contraceptive implant removal.
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.