Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Jul 25;9(1):36.
doi: 10.1186/s40834-024-00278-8.

Intrauterine device (IUD) migration to the fallopian tube: a rare location for a translocated IUD with no visceral injury

Affiliations

Intrauterine device (IUD) migration to the fallopian tube: a rare location for a translocated IUD with no visceral injury

Peter Joseph Wangwe et al. Contracept Reprod Med. .

Abstract

Background: Loss of Intra Uterine Device (IUD) following silent perforation of the uterus either during or after IUD insertion is an uncommon finding due to a lack of immediate follow-up. We report a rare case in which uterine perforation following the migration of IUD to the right fallopian tube without visceral injury. The patient presented with lower abdominal pain and pain during sex for one year since IUD insertion. On examination, we noted tenderness on the right suprapubic region and on speculum examination, no IUD thread was seen. A radiological pelvic examination showed an empty uterus without an IUD. Laparotomy and retrieval of migrated IUD was done followed by repair of perforated uterus.

Conclusion: Migrated IUD with silent uterine perforation without visceral injury is a distressing clinical condition both to the patient and the clinician. This case is reported to increase awareness in doing immediate vaginal examination and pelvic ultrasound post-IUD insertion.

Keywords: Chronic pelvic pain; Intrauterine devices; Migration; No visceral injury; Silent uterine perforation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Abdominal USS Report
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Plain Abdominal X ray
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
CT Scan of the Abdomen
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
CT Scan of the Abdomen with Inverted T
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
The tip of an inverted T shape of IUD in the parametrium
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Health rt ovary, rt fallopian tube and uterus
Fig. 7
Fig. 7
Process of extracting the IUD
Fig. 8
Fig. 8
IUD after extraction

Similar articles

References

    1. Badu-Peprah A. The role of multimodality radiological imaging in extrauterine misplaced iucd: a case report. Afr J Reprod Health. 2020;24(4):212–7. - PubMed
    1. Benaguida H. Intraperitoneal migration of an intrauterine device (IUD): a case report. Annals Med Surg. 2021;68:102547.10.1016/j.amsu.2021.102547 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Carroll A. Far migration of an intrauterine contraceptive device from the uterus to the small bowel. Clin Case Rep. 2022;10(3):e05589. 10.1002/ccr3.5589 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Elsheikh H, ElRefaei M, Abd Elfattah S. Assessment of misplaced intrauterine contraceptive devices by different imaging modalities: a cross-sectional study. Benha Med J. 2021;38:137–46.
    1. Fadiloglu S. Relationship between copper IUD complications and ultrasonographic findings. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2018;297(4):989–96. 10.1007/s00404-018-4711-y - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources