Article Text

PDF

Intra-uterine implant (GyneFix) lost via intestinal route?
  1. Simone Reuter, Dr. med., MFFP, Clinical Medical Officer1 and
  2. Srinivasan Krishnamurthy, FRCS, FRCOG, Associate Professor2
  1. Contraception and Sexual Health Service North Derbyshire, Chesterfield, UK
  2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Montreal General Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
  1. Correspondence Dr Simone Reuter, Contraception and Sexual Health Service, Saltergate Health Centre, Chesterfield S40 1SX, UK

Abstract

Uterine perforation has long been regarded as a complication of the insertion of an intra-uterine contraceptive device (IUD). The development of modern devices with sophisticated insertion systems as well as advanced training requirements seeks to minimise the risk of adverse insertion incidents for women choosing intra-uterine contraception. This case report highlights the continuing need for intra- and post-insertion vigilance as even recent advances in IUD technique and technology do not guarantee risk-free insertion.

  • Accepted January 12, 2001.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

  • Accepted January 12, 2001.

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.