» Articles » PMID: 27920988

Ureteric Obstruction Caused by a Migrated Intrauterine Device

Overview
Journal Urol Case Rep
Specialty Urology
Date 2016 Dec 7
PMID 27920988
Citations 5
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

We present an extremely rare case of ureteric obstruction caused by a migrated intrauterine device. A 36-year-old female with complaints of almost 10 months left flank pain presented to our hospital. She used an IUD for contraception for 6 months after the birth of her first child. The IUD was not visible then. Ultrasonography (US) revealed that left severe hydronephrosis and upper ureterectasis. Pelvic computed tomography (CT) found that IUD was located very close to the lower ureter which was adjacent to the third anatomize physiological narrow. Laparoscopy was performed to remove the migrated IUD. After 5 months of surgery, left hydronephrosis was exacerbated. This time we chose to perform the ureterocystostomy to relieve the hydronephrosis. We reported this rare case to remind that we must keep alert to the loss of the IUD to prevent it may cause severe injury of the nearby organs. IUD must be carefully researched for possible perforation of the uterus and migration to the pelvic organs.

Citing Articles

Intrauterine device (IUD) migration completely into the abdominal cavity and half into the bladder to form a stone: a case report and mini-review.

Yu F, Chen M, Cao H, Yang G, Wang W, Wang Y BMC Urol. 2024; 24(1):280.

PMID: 39710656 PMC: 11664840. DOI: 10.1186/s12894-024-01676-5.


Migration of an intrauterine device to the posterior urethra with stone formation: a case report.

Liu C, Xia Y, Pang Q, Zhao Z, Zhao J Front Med (Lausanne). 2024; 11:1449443.

PMID: 39238594 PMC: 11375611. DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2024.1449443.


Hydronephrosis Due to Intraureteral Migration of Missed Intrauterine Device.

Karkin K, Vuruskan E, Aydamirov M, Kaplan E, Aksay B, Gurlen G Cureus. 2024; 16(2):e53820.

PMID: 38465132 PMC: 10924242. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.53820.


Endoscopic Removal of an Intrauterine Device in the Left Distal Ureter.

Kwon Y, Paneque T, Chandra A, Chua K, Munshi F, Findlay B J Endourol Case Rep. 2021; 6(4):502-504.

PMID: 33457713 PMC: 7803279. DOI: 10.1089/cren.2020.0076.


Intrauterine device visualized as extrinsic bladder mass on cystoscopy.

Clancy A, Gerridzen R, Pascali D Int Urogynecol J. 2017; 28(9):1429-1430.

PMID: 28593368 DOI: 10.1007/s00192-017-3382-8.

References
1.
Arslan A, Kanat-Pektas M, Yesilyurt H, Bilge U . Colon penetration by a copper intrauterine device: a case report with literature review. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2008; 279(3):395-7. DOI: 10.1007/s00404-008-0716-2. View

2.
Meshikhes A, El-Tair M, Al-Zahir A . Laparoscopic removal of a migrated intrauterine contraceptive device. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2010; 30(3):317-9. DOI: 10.3109/01443610903585200. View

3.
ZAKIN D, STERN W, Rosenblatt R . Complete and partial uterine perforation and embedding following insertion of intrauterine devices. I. Classification, complications, mechanism, incidence, and missing string. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 1981; 36(7):335-53. DOI: 10.1097/00006254-198107000-00001. View

4.
Sirikci A, Sarica K, Bayram M . Ureteral displacement due to a migrated intrauterine contraceptive device. Urol Int. 2000; 65(3):179-80. DOI: 10.1159/000064869. View

5.
Kho K, Chamsy D . Perforated intraperitoneal intrauterine contraceptive devices: diagnosis, management, and clinical outcomes. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2014; 21(4):596-601. PMC: 6661232. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmig.2013.12.123. View